From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/18] m68k: fix access_ok for coldfire
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 10:00:39 +0100
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdWMhP5WgZ7CvOz53SyfizaAvLkHbeuds8G+_nZkwzhWWw@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20220216131332.1489939-1-arnd@kernel.org> <20220216131332.1489939-11-arnd@kernel.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20220216131332.1489939-11-arnd@kernel.org>
List-ID: <linux-hexagon.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, Linux-Arch <linux-arch@vger.kernel.org>, Linux MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>, Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>, Brian Cain <bcain@codeaurora.org>, Michal Simek <monstr@monstr.eu>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>, Nick Hu <nickhu@andestech.com>, Greentime Hu <green.hu@gmail.com>, Dinh Nguyen <dinguyen@kernel.org>, Stafford Horne <shorne@gmail.com>, Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>, Peter

Hi Arnd,

On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 2:17 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org> wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
>
> While most m68k platforms use separate address spaces for user
> and kernel space, at least coldfire does not, and the other
> ones have a TASK_SIZE that is less than the entire 4GB address
> range.
>
> Using the default implementation of __access_ok() stops coldfire
> user space from trivially accessing kernel memory.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Thanks for your patch!

> --- a/arch/m68k/include/asm/uaccess.h
> +++ b/arch/m68k/include/asm/uaccess.h
> @@ -12,14 +12,21 @@
>  #include <asm/extable.h>
>
>  /* We let the MMU do all checking */
> -static inline int access_ok(const void __user *addr,
> +static inline int access_ok(const void __user *ptr,
>                             unsigned long size)
>  {
> +       unsigned long limit = TASK_SIZE;
> +       unsigned long addr = (unsigned long)ptr;
> +
>         /*
>          * XXX: for !CONFIG_CPU_HAS_ADDRESS_SPACES this really needs to check
>          * for TASK_SIZE!
> +        * Removing this helper is probably sufficient.
>          */

Shouldn't the above comment block be removed completely,
as this is now implemented below?

> -       return 1;
> +       if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CPU_HAS_ADDRESS_SPACES))
> +               return 1;
> +
> +       return (size <= limit) && (addr <= (limit - size));
>  }

Any pesky compilers that warn (or worse with -Werror) about
"condition always true" for TASK_SIZE = 0xFFFFFFFFUL?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert