Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] Assorted improvements to usercopy

William Kucharski
2021-12-13T20:54:18Z

Thanks, good explanation.

> On Dec 13, 2021, at 1:47 PM, Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 08:27:42PM +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 07:18:57PM +0000, William Kucharski wrote:
>>> I like these, but a quick question:
>>>
>>> Since the usercopy_abort() calls are all because the offset exceeds the page
>>> size, is there a reason why you don't specifically state that via the detail
>>> parameter rather than just supply a NULL pointer?
>>
>> Hmm ... I'd defer to Kees on this, because I'm not familiar with
>> usercopy_abort() usage, but the only places which use the detail
>> parameter today are slab/slub, which use it to pass the name of
>> the slab. I think the user is supposed to infer that we overran the
>> end of the page based on the offset & length values.
>
> I agree that leaving it NULL is best here. The "detail" is really about
> adding more information about which thing it was, which for slab makes
> sense, but most other stuff there isn't really anything to quickly
> distinguish one from another (i.e. vmap is all vmap).
>
> --
> Kees Cook