From: Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>
To: Sebastian Smolorz <ssm@domain.hid>
Cc: xenomai-core <xenomai@xenomai.org>
Subject: [Xenomai-core] Re: iovec overwriting by CAN stack
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 19:30:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4615323A.9020108@domain.hid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1HYHba-0000MO-IC@mailer.emlix.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5309 bytes --]
Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>> Sebastian Smolorz wrote:
>>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>> Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>>>>>>> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Wolfgang,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> it's late, so I may have misread somecode, but don't you "update"
>>>>>>>> the iovec descriptors a user passes on send/recvmsg on return
>>>>>>>> (namely iovec_len)? I received some complaints about this /wrt to
>>>>>>>> in-kernel CAN stack usage.
>>>>>>> It's done here:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.rts.uni-hannover.de/xenomai/lxr/source/ksrc/drivers/can/rt
>>>>>>> ca n_ raw.c?v=SVN-trunk#881
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://www.rts.uni-hannover.de/xenomai/lxr/source/ksrc/drivers/can/rt
>>>>>>> ca n_ raw.c?v=SVN-trunk#734
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I may have missed something. What are the real complaints? Is there a
>>>>>>> test program?
>>>>>> Not yet (will commit the related patch to our RACK likely later
>>>>>> today). It's simply sending frames while re-using the msg+iovec
>>>>>> structs in a loop.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I always considered the same well-know behaviour of RTnet a bug, but
>>>>>>>> now I found your code is doing this systematically, also for user
>>>>>>>> space callers. Is this behaviour undefined or even required
>>>>>>>> according POSIX or whatever?
>>>>>>> I don't know, it's Sebastian's Kode.
>>>>>> Hmm, hope he will not say that he imitated RTnet...
>>>>> Rather an imitation of the Linux kernel's behaviour. The
>>>>> memcpy_toiovec() and memcpy_fromiovec() functions [1] also modify the
>>>>> original iovec.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://lxr.free-electrons.com/source/net/core/iovec.c
>>>> But that's the kernel's private (and user-safe) copy. I failed to find
>>>> it writing that back to user space.
>>> Hm. Ad hoc, I don't recall why the userspace's iovec is also updated.
>>> Perhaps my intention was to make the use of rtcan_raw_sendmsg consistent
>>> for kernel and userspace RT-Tasks so that both can rely on finding
>>> modified iovecs after calling sendmsg/recvmsg. But I'm not absolutely
>>> sure if there isn't a better explanation for this. I will try to find the
>>> reason in my backup memory. ;-)
>> So, unless we find some reason why we _must_ modify user's iovec, either
>> for send or receive, I would say: kill the user copy-back and work in
>> both case (kernel / user space caller) on the local copy of iovec (if we
>> still need to modify it all then).
>
> Attached is a patch which leaves the caller's iovec unmodified. It compiles
> successfully (not tested further).
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Index: ChangeLog
> ===================================================================
> --- ChangeLog (Revision 2348)
> +++ ChangeLog (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -1,3 +1,8 @@
> +2007-04-02 Sebastian Smolorz <ssm@domain.hid>
> +
> + * ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_raw.c (rtcan_raw_recvmsg, rtcan_raw_sendmsg):
> + Remove modification of caller's original iovec.
> +
> 2007-03-31 Philippe Gerum <rpm@xenomai.org>
>
> * include/nucleus/queue.h (moveq): Fix source tail pointer.
> Index: ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_raw.c
> ===================================================================
> --- ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_raw.c (Revision 2348)
> +++ ksrc/drivers/can/rtcan_raw.c (Arbeitskopie)
> @@ -731,13 +731,6 @@ ssize_t rtcan_raw_recvmsg(struct rtdm_de
> if (rtdm_copy_to_user(user_info, iov->iov_base, &frame,
> sizeof(can_frame_t)))
> return -EFAULT;
> - /* Adjust iovec in the common way */
> - iov->iov_base += sizeof(can_frame_t);
> - iov->iov_len -= sizeof(can_frame_t);
> - /* ... and copy it, too. */
> - if (rtdm_copy_to_user(user_info, msg->msg_iov, iov,
> - sizeof(struct iovec)))
> - return -EFAULT;
>
> /* Copy timestamp if existent and wanted */
> if (msg->msg_controllen) {
> @@ -762,9 +755,6 @@ ssize_t rtcan_raw_recvmsg(struct rtdm_de
>
> /* Copy CAN frame */
> memcpy(iov->iov_base, &frame, sizeof(can_frame_t));
> - /* Adjust iovec in the common way */
> - iov->iov_base += sizeof(can_frame_t);
> - iov->iov_len -= sizeof(can_frame_t);
>
> /* Copy timestamp if existent and wanted */
> if (msg->msg_controllen) {
> @@ -878,16 +868,6 @@ ssize_t rtcan_raw_sendmsg(struct rtdm_de
> frame = &frame_buf;
> }
>
> - /* Adjust iovec in the common way */
> - iov->iov_base += sizeof(can_frame_t);
> - iov->iov_len -= sizeof(can_frame_t);
> - /* ... and copy it back to userspace if necessary */
> - if (user_info) {
> - if (rtdm_copy_to_user(user_info, msg->msg_iov, iov,
> - sizeof(struct iovec)))
> - return -EFAULT;
> - }
> -
> /* At last, we've got the frame ... */
>
> /* Check if DLC between 0 and 15 */
Basic ACK (as still no one came up remarking we actually need the update
of iovec).
I would just always use struct iovec iov_buf for the internal handling,
means always copy the original (also from in-kernel users) and simply
kill the struct iovec *iov indirection.
Jan
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 250 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-04-05 17:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-03-30 0:59 [Xenomai-core] iovec overwriting by CAN stack Jan Kiszka
2007-03-30 6:44 ` [Xenomai-core] " Wolfgang Grandegger
2007-03-30 6:50 ` Jan Kiszka
2007-03-30 12:18 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2007-03-30 12:27 ` Jan Kiszka
2007-03-30 13:06 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2007-03-30 14:17 ` Jan Kiszka
2007-04-02 8:09 ` Sebastian Smolorz
2007-04-05 17:30 ` Jan Kiszka [this message]
2007-04-10 7:37 ` [Xenomai-core] " Sebastian Smolorz
2007-04-10 9:43 ` Jan Kiszka
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4615323A.9020108@domain.hid \
--to=jan.kiszka@domain.hid \
--cc=ssm@domain.hid \
--cc=xenomai@xenomai.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.