From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
To: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>, Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] Introduce uniptr_t as a generic "universal" pointer
Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2023 16:38:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230809143801.GA693@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87edkce118.wl-tiwai@suse.de>
On Wed, Aug 09, 2023 at 04:35:47PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
> Although sockptr_t is used already in several places as a "universal"
> pointer, it's still too confusing to use it in other subsystems, since
> people see it always as if it were a network-related stuff.
>
> This patch defines a more generic type, uniptr_t, that does exactly as
> same as sockptr_t for a wider use. As of now, it's almost 1:1 copy
> with renames (just with comprehensive header file inclusions).
The original set_fs removal series did that as uptr_t, and Linus
hated it with passion. I somehow doubt he's going to like it more now.
> Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
> ---
>
> This is a RFC patch, or rather a material for bikeshedding.
>
> Initially the discussion started from the use of sockptr_t for the
> sound driver in Andy's patch:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230721100146.67293-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com
> followed by a bigger series of patches by me:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230731154718.31048-1-tiwai@suse.de
>
> The first reaction to the patches (including my own) were
> "why sockptr_t?" Yes, it's just confusing. So, here it is, a
> proposal of defining the new type for the very purpose as sockptr_t.
>
> The name of uniptr_t is nothing but my random pick up, and we can
> endlessly discuss for a better name (genptr_t or whatever).
> I'm totally open for the name.
>
> After this introduction, sockptr_t can be alias of uniptr_t,
> e.g. simply override with "#define sockptr_t uniptr_t" or such.
> How can it be is another open question.
>
> Also, we can clean up the macro implementation along with it;
> there seem a few (rather minor) issues as suggested by Andy:
> https://lore.kernel.org/r/ZMlGKy7ibjkQ6ii7@smile.fi.intel.com
>
> Honestly speaking, I don't mind to keep using sockptr_t generically
> despite of the name, if people agree. The rename might make sense,
> though, if it's more widely used in other subsystems in future.
>
>
> Takashi
>
> ===
>
> include/linux/uniptr.h | 121 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 121 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/uniptr.h
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/uniptr.h b/include/linux/uniptr.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..f7994d3a45eb
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/uniptr.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,121 @@
> +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> +/*
> + * Support for "universal" pointers that can point to either kernel or userspace
> + * memory.
> + *
> + * Original code from sockptr.h
> + * Copyright (c) 2020 Christoph Hellwig
> + */
> +#ifndef _LINUX_UNIPTR_H
> +#define _LINUX_UNIPTR_H
> +
> +#include <linux/err.h>
> +#include <linux/slab.h>
> +#include <linux/string.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/uaccess.h>
> +
> +typedef struct {
> + union {
> + void *kernel;
> + void __user *user;
> + };
> + bool is_kernel : 1;
> +} uniptr_t;
> +
> +static inline bool uniptr_is_kernel(uniptr_t uniptr)
> +{
> + return uniptr.is_kernel;
> +}
> +
> +static inline uniptr_t KERNEL_UNIPTR(void *p)
> +{
> + return (uniptr_t) { .kernel = p, .is_kernel = true };
> +}
> +
> +static inline uniptr_t USER_UNIPTR(void __user *p)
> +{
> + return (uniptr_t) { .user = p };
> +}
> +
> +static inline bool uniptr_is_null(uniptr_t uniptr)
> +{
> + if (uniptr_is_kernel(uniptr))
> + return !uniptr.kernel;
> + return !uniptr.user;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int copy_from_uniptr_offset(void *dst, uniptr_t src,
> + size_t offset, size_t size)
> +{
> + if (!uniptr_is_kernel(src))
> + return copy_from_user(dst, src.user + offset, size);
> + memcpy(dst, src.kernel + offset, size);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int copy_from_uniptr(void *dst, uniptr_t src, size_t size)
> +{
> + return copy_from_uniptr_offset(dst, src, 0, size);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int copy_to_uniptr_offset(uniptr_t dst, size_t offset,
> + const void *src, size_t size)
> +{
> + if (!uniptr_is_kernel(dst))
> + return copy_to_user(dst.user + offset, src, size);
> + memcpy(dst.kernel + offset, src, size);
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline int copy_to_uniptr(uniptr_t dst, const void *src, size_t size)
> +{
> + return copy_to_uniptr_offset(dst, 0, src, size);
> +}
> +
> +static inline void *memdup_uniptr(uniptr_t src, size_t len)
> +{
> + void *p = kmalloc_track_caller(len, GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
> +
> + if (!p)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> + if (copy_from_uniptr(p, src, len)) {
> + kfree(p);
> + return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
> + }
> + return p;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void *memdup_uniptr_nul(uniptr_t src, size_t len)
> +{
> + char *p = kmalloc_track_caller(len + 1, GFP_KERNEL);
> +
> + if (!p)
> + return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
> + if (copy_from_uniptr(p, src, len)) {
> + kfree(p);
> + return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
> + }
> + p[len] = '\0';
> + return p;
> +}
> +
> +static inline long strncpy_from_uniptr(char *dst, uniptr_t src, size_t count)
> +{
> + if (uniptr_is_kernel(src)) {
> + size_t len = min(strnlen(src.kernel, count - 1) + 1, count);
> +
> + memcpy(dst, src.kernel, len);
> + return len;
> + }
> + return strncpy_from_user(dst, src.user, count);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int check_zeroed_uniptr(uniptr_t src, size_t offset, size_t size)
> +{
> + if (!uniptr_is_kernel(src))
> + return check_zeroed_user(src.user + offset, size);
> + return memchr_inv(src.kernel + offset, 0, size) == NULL;
> +}
> +
> +#endif /* _LINUX_UNIPTR_H */
> --
> 2.35.3
---end quoted text---
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-09 14:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-09 14:35 [PATCH RFC] Introduce uniptr_t as a generic "universal" pointer Takashi Iwai
2023-08-09 14:38 ` Christoph Hellwig [this message]
2023-08-09 14:44 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-08-09 15:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-09 16:08 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-08-14 16:06 ` David Laight
2023-08-09 15:48 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-09 16:05 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-08-09 17:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-09 17:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2023-08-09 18:08 ` Takashi Iwai
2023-08-10 14:48 ` Andy Shevchenko
2023-08-11 13:54 ` Takashi Iwai
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=20230809143801.GA693@lst.de \
--to=hch@lst.de \
--cc=andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tiwai@suse.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).