From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 980D4C282CE for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E36E20863 for ; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="RXQsLyR4" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 6E36E20863 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=Mw5zlcwKKEGC6uITNR9CfYVJOlI/Kos7Oj+UhrjtChk=; b=RXQsLyR4Gf5IBw i8Zi5RjhY1Fi4bYoOwBowUuclDLygRmTMgzB25klWIInn/Zr8Wcetj0knUILUUh0N06KOcrAdn8Lp ZQ/FRAzZh09/dtfSXb+t/2FkC+Y8xaSnm3Q/6pjmvD4dvD7iK4ByHOogLKEZ2+hpIoczk71MCgsxt dhmVooExHTK1QBIJFJHRivqjMBaWvVR0mVaNhy0FmQRZMbzL4+xUu6zRG/dCQTC1dI9dNLpA3jiNk 0ccTU2cKY1Az0cdoDgK2/zB/qX+2LbqjaCMuEzqHz8gZJxIpfHXxRa6dCIsU137Y7IdutWDapDXIm Ft9s92yCYhLDPkuapGGg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hTRcj-000891-Ei; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:49:41 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70] helo=foss.arm.com) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1hTRcg-00080A-36 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 22 May 2019 13:49:39 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5198E80D; Wed, 22 May 2019 06:49:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e103592.cambridge.arm.com (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 94CFA3F575; Wed, 22 May 2019 06:49:30 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 22 May 2019 14:49:28 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Jason Gunthorpe Subject: Re: [PATCH v15 00/17] arm64: untag user pointers passed to the kernel Message-ID: <20190522134925.GV28398@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20190517144931.GA56186@arrakis.emea.arm.com> <20190521184856.GC2922@ziepe.ca> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190521184856.GC2922@ziepe.ca> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20190522_064938_151079_6D75AF79 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 22.82 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: Mark Rutland , kvm@vger.kernel.org, Christian Koenig , Szabolcs Nagy , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , dri-devel@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, Lee Smith , linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, Vincenzo Frascino , Jacob Bramley , Leon Romanovsky , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, amd-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Evgeniy Stepanov , linux-media@vger.kernel.org, Kees Cook , Ruben Ayrapetyan , Andrey Konovalov , Kevin Brodsky , Alex Williamson , Mauro Carvalho Chehab , Dmitry Vyukov , Kostya Serebryany , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Felix Kuehling , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jens Wiklander , Ramana Radhakrishnan , Alexander Deucher , Andrew Morton , Robin Murphy , Yishai Hadas , Luc Van Oostenryck Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+infradead-linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Tue, May 21, 2019 at 03:48:56PM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote: > On Fri, May 17, 2019 at 03:49:31PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > > The tagged pointers (whether hwasan or MTE) should ideally be a > > transparent feature for the application writer but I don't think we can > > solve it entirely and make it seamless for the multitude of ioctls(). > > I'd say you only opt in to such feature if you know what you are doing > > and the user code takes care of specific cases like ioctl(), hence the > > prctl() proposal even for the hwasan. > > I'm not sure such a dire view is warrented.. > > The ioctl situation is not so bad, other than a few special cases, > most drivers just take a 'void __user *' and pass it as an argument to > some function that accepts a 'void __user *'. sparse et al verify > this. > > As long as the core functions do the right thing the drivers will be > OK. > > The only place things get dicy is if someone casts to unsigned long > (ie for vma work) but I think that reflects that our driver facing > APIs for VMAs are compatible with static analysis (ie I have no > earthly idea why get_user_pages() accepts an unsigned long), not that > this is too hard. If multiple people will care about this, perhaps we should try to annotate types more explicitly in SYSCALL_DEFINEx() and ABI data structures. For example, we could have a couple of mutually exclusive modifiers T __object * T __vaddr * (or U __vaddr) In the first case the pointer points to an object (in the C sense) that the call may dereference but not use for any other purpose. In the latter case the pointer (or other type) is a virtual address that the call does not dereference but my do other things with. Also U __really(T) to tell static analysers the real type of pointers smuggled through UAPI disguised as other types (*cough* KVM, etc.) We could gradually make sparse more strict about the presence of annotations and allowed conversions, add get/put_user() variants that demand explicit annotation, etc. find_vma() wouldn't work with a __object pointer, for example. A get_user_pages_for_dereference() might be needed for __object pointers (embodying a promise from the caller that only the object will be dereferenced within the mapped pages). Thoughts? This kind of thing would need widespread buy-in in order to be viable. Cheers ---Dave _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel