Re: [patches][RFC] situation with csum_and_copy_... API
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Date: 2014-11-19 20:25:59
Also in:
lkml
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:40:53 +0000
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:47:45AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:quoted
I do have a patch doing just that; the question is what to do with csum-and-copy primitives. Originally I planned to simply strip those access_ok() from those (both the explicit calls and use of copy_from_user() where we ought to use __copy_from_user(), etc.), but that's not nice to potential out-of-tree callers of those suckers. If any of those exist and manage to cope with the wonderful calling conventions, that is. As it is, we have the total of 4 callers of csum_and_copy_from_user() and 2 callers of csum_and_copy_to_user(), all in networking code. Do we care about potential out-of-tree users existing and getting screwed by such change? Davem, Linus?FWIW, the beginning of series in question follows; removal of those access_ok() is 3/5. The series is longer than that (see vfs.git#iov_iter-net for a bit more, and there's more stuff in local queue still too much in flux to push them out), but all the stuff relevant to validating iovecs on sendmsg/recvmsg and getting rid of excessive access_ok() is in the first 5 commits.
Al I really like this series, especially patch #2. Sorry for taking so long to review this, I just wanted to make sure we got this right. Can you give me a pull request for just these 5 patches? Then feel free to post the next batch for review, I'm eager to see it as are others. Thanks!