From: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>
Cc: Benson Leung <bleung@chromium.org>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
Danilo Krummrich <dakr@kernel.org>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Laurent Pinchart <laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com>,
Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@bgdev.pl>,
Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>,
Simona Vetter <simona.vetter@ffwll.ch>,
Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/7] revocable: Add fops replacement
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2025 02:36:58 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aPGryj-V5PQZRtoI@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251016123149.GA88213@nvidia.com>
On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 09:31:49AM -0300, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 05:42:02AM +0000, Tzung-Bi Shih wrote:
> > Introduce fs_revocable_replace() to simplify the use of the revocable
> > API with file_operations.
> >
> > The function, should be called from a driver's ->open(), replaces the
> > fops with a wrapper that automatically handles the `try_access` and
> > `withdraw_access`.
> >
> > When the file is closed, the wrapper's ->release() restores the original
> > fops and cleanups. This centralizes the revocable logic, making drivers
> > cleaner and easier to maintain.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tzung-Bi Shih <tzungbi@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > PoC patch.
> >
> > Known issues:
> > - All file operations call revocable_try_access() for guaranteeing the
> > resource even if the resource may be unused in the fops.
>
> Why is this so complicated??
>
> You already added a per-flip struct:
>
> > +struct fs_revocable_replacement {
> > + const struct fs_revocable_operations *frops;
> > + const struct file_operations *orig_fops;
> > + struct file_operations fops;
> > + struct revocable **revs;
> > + size_t num_revs;
> > +};
>
> Why does it need so much junk in it?
>
> struct fs_revocable_replacement {
> struct srcu_struct srcu;
> bool *alive;
> };
>
> That's it. When the caller sets this up it provides a bool * pointer
> from it's own private struct that is kept krefcounted to life cycle of
> the struct file.
>
> Then the ops wrapers are a simple thing - generate them with a macro:
>
> srcu_read_lock(&f_rr->srcu);
> if (*f_rr_>alive)
> ret = f_rr->orig_fops->XX(...)
> else
> ret = -ENODEV;
> srcu_read_unlock(&f_rr->srcu);
> return ret;
>
> No need for all this revokable maze to do somethinig so simple.
Imagining the following example:
/* res1 and res2 are provided by hot-pluggable devices. */
struct filp_priv {
void *res1;
void *res2;
};
/* In .open() fops */
priv = kzalloc(sizeof(struct filp_priv), ...);
priv->res1 = ...;
priv->res2 = ...;
filp->private_data = priv;
/* In .read() fops */
priv = filp->private_data;
priv->res1 // could result UAF if the device has gone
priv->res2 // could result UAF if the device has gone
How does the bool * work for the example?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-17 2:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-16 5:41 [PATCH v5 0/7] platform/chrome: Fix a possible UAF via revocable Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:41 ` [PATCH v5 1/7] revocable: Revocable resource management Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:41 ` [PATCH v5 2/7] revocable: Add Kunit test cases Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:42 ` [PATCH v5 3/7] selftests: revocable: Add kselftest cases Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:42 ` [PATCH v5 4/7] platform/chrome: Protect cros_ec_device lifecycle with revocable Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:42 ` [PATCH v5 5/7] revocable: Add fops replacement Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 12:31 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-17 2:36 ` Tzung-Bi Shih [this message]
2025-10-17 13:49 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-17 16:07 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-17 16:21 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-19 15:08 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-20 11:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-21 4:49 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-21 12:15 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-23 14:22 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-23 14:51 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-23 15:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2025-10-23 15:57 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-23 16:20 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-10-23 16:48 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-23 18:30 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-12-11 3:23 ` Laurent Pinchart
2025-12-11 3:47 ` Wolfram Sang
2025-12-11 8:05 ` Laurent Pinchart
2025-12-11 8:36 ` Wolfram Sang
2025-12-11 13:43 ` Laurent Pinchart
2025-12-11 14:46 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-12-12 8:32 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-11-07 4:11 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-11-07 14:12 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-17 16:29 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-10-17 16:37 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-17 18:19 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-10-17 18:44 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-17 21:41 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-10-17 22:56 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2025-10-23 15:32 ` Danilo Krummrich
2025-10-16 18:38 ` Randy Dunlap
2025-10-17 2:41 ` Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:42 ` [PATCH v5 6/7] char: misc: Leverage revocable " Tzung-Bi Shih
2025-10-16 5:42 ` [PATCH v5 7/7] platform/chrome: cros_ec_chardev: Secure cros_ec_device via revocable Tzung-Bi Shih
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=aPGryj-V5PQZRtoI@google.com \
--to=tzungbi@kernel.org \
--cc=bleung@chromium.org \
--cc=brgl@bgdev.pl \
--cc=chrome-platform@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=dakr@kernel.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
--cc=laurent.pinchart@ideasonboard.com \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rafael@kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=simona.vetter@ffwll.ch \
--cc=wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).