Re: [PATCH v4 32/35] s390/uaccess: Add KMSAN support to put_user() and get_user()

Ilya Leoshkevich
2024-06-18T10:01:41Z

On Tue, 2024-06-18 at 11:52 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 18, 2024 at 11:40 AM Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2024-06-18 at 11:24 +0200, Alexander Potapenko wrote:
> > > On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 5:39 PM Ilya Leoshkevich
> > > <iii@linux.ibm.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > put_user() uses inline assembly with precise constraints, so
> > > > Clang
> > > > is
> > > > in principle capable of instrumenting it automatically.
> > > > Unfortunately,
> > > > one of the constraints contains a dereferenced user pointer,
> > > > and
> > > > Clang
> > > > does not currently distinguish user and kernel pointers.
> > > > Therefore
> > > > KMSAN attempts to access shadow for user pointers, which is not
> > > > a
> > > > right
> > > > thing to do.
> > > >
> > > > An obvious fix to add __no_sanitize_memory to __put_user_fn()
> > > > does
> > > > not
> > > > work, since it's __always_inline. And __always_inline cannot be
> > > > removed
> > > > due to the __put_user_bad() trick.
> > > >
> > > > A different obvious fix of using the "a" instead of the "+Q"
> > > > constraint
> > > > degrades the code quality, which is very important here, since
> > > > it's
> > > > a
> > > > hot path.
> > > >
> > > > Instead, repurpose the __put_user_asm() macro to define
> > > > __put_user_{char,short,int,long}_noinstr() functions and mark
> > > > them
> > > > with
> > > > __no_sanitize_memory. For the non-KMSAN builds make them
> > > > __always_inline in order to keep the generated code quality.
> > > > Also
> > > > define __put_user_{char,short,int,long}() functions, which call
> > > > the
> > > > aforementioned ones and which *are* instrumented, because they
> > > > call
> > > > KMSAN hooks, which may be implemented as macros.
> > >
> > > I am not really familiar with s390 assembly, but I think you
> > > still
> > > need to call kmsan_copy_to_user() and kmsan_copy_from_user() to
> > > properly initialize the copied data and report infoleaks.
> > > Would it be possible to insert calls to linux/instrumented.h
> > > hooks
> > > into uaccess functions?
> >
> > Aren't the existing instrument_get_user() / instrument_put_user()
> > calls
> > sufficient?
>
> Oh, sorry, I overlooked them. Yes, those should be sufficient.
> But you don't include linux/instrumented.h, do you?

No, apparently we get this include from somewhere else by accident.
I will add it in a separate patch.