From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pf1-f179.google.com (mail-pf1-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B96430ACF9 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 16:41:59 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.179 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757695322; cv=none; b=tA6PFx2hATiSQ+CbyouLWeoz6lmbu0IELSfZt65J6FK9yA1plKxZ2SwNy0UuMKf/FXRsKadzaeR/kWYb5DmCcMzXI6+BpK9pDISR5B47Fn4gLfrSv2vb1beiW44TGTXQxqbP6v6c2din2cTJbEWcsrf6//GzD5SXPuOh0X0m62Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757695322; c=relaxed/simple; bh=iYOckhXvoXHI89aZgEd+P0bhwExKnzLKVvLjUbSKj3E=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dZ0qIrrqo17n0B7wpm9VJA1vmRY0B7p2/GhoeifN1wUbg8QiPUdy/hd3ru9zc+VT3xZ41P2+UxgVCkrBoFfKvXc4o0b/4gkbA7fuUcbIH94dUIdTGvWua7yCKXrr5OI4Yz7pOqUItrnIL+4jurcqQHVFp9USSS8HO9K1fvzwjoE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=furiosa.ai; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=furiosa.ai; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=furiosa.ai header.i=@furiosa.ai header.b=NW+5Ac7w; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.210.179 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=furiosa.ai Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=furiosa.ai Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=furiosa.ai header.i=@furiosa.ai header.b="NW+5Ac7w" Received: by mail-pf1-f179.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-76e4fc419a9so1885764b3a.0 for ; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 09:41:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=furiosa.ai; s=google; t=1757695319; x=1758300119; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=eUzTaaKQdM78ZqXpIezMElUSzU7VXjFq6bGRx3LctHs=; b=NW+5Ac7wBU3jLuW4Je3egpX7udJ9A1sqenRMhhOBxh0GS5dpAJ77vTgwN1BlOKxR4m pCnFcIl0K8XDYkBorXUDTJhocRANny2atAWmIXBrd3kVdTlndHVH5qCs5xR/p866RTdI FogH0m2zzqDTOcMsOp9t50DOkrni6t/EDLsuU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1757695319; x=1758300119; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=eUzTaaKQdM78ZqXpIezMElUSzU7VXjFq6bGRx3LctHs=; b=XCMzH1rINHQsju9bK/1rUlASLcGFDRnIX1GORp5fV1WiykfrCXFreNoCErThGmyR/J o8ITkJ9w/jDf8/kmS9lSzetjJkDIa4KgcIj+7I8Eywy5imbhB5ej5V0Gz9ECuxYGjM1J GejIX5M1ZxySW7ZJrst1otc3C8QKHQNujkF8QClBwL7T7zi7fOfRjmZJVNVt7lO51vQF 5KYlmSE7DlxmWFwXyfxjW4uyna8vbMz5GSD2IWZcR53W+bX5PpP4TP4saTW2vrDr0j7e SPaoU0uVW16VVCi5pViZm9j3vXDMKSfAz703SInJljscTFuUZSFa+iJshqMsi8O+yd1C 3r5Q== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXU0LcePRuwm9qO/hiesu0ZfoskAJ4PnULD+N7/mSu6Q+NjDVdpc/+ZLa5SZqy9MS/l3zBElt6aUnEM8Qxk5w==@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwceVgkRDvePZFyFi79T7vzgDI43oCTEQjC1YqB4RTfygNc/A4X 2SNYTnSxQkcrcEiP9u3DAuf1es2GK6/6B0KdSa6ZPHnvzHUFi+PU+Nnz87siQBR7MzY= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuV9tXr4Ge28nMtHZ+5KT0vl1HL89wGX+2qN1bxNN7HEj2Mm/6DXwtRtD7uQvR fZvqQWoCYC6ez0rAC1DfJvdojjueI4k4zKi/6ABzL2Okei6PR6ddvzbyCtwi5U8WScdqc992HLf 0qF7/rFKLgXzxtJzYPSchxqhfVNVeNp9BXdXEQ4VWw5yn7bM3a2cXsjEueS7UBefDxGD3otv5w/ C4Y9pWtOqOb+pgeZwNxcHX7pinQqMudPcoq6SxIYEylgxx/OyAGQn+P/RSXng6ObaL8P0OJlr9Q Wjl6/tiXBBgIEZAoXb/txOiG+6+ziqrZGdKzl6rbwPfCje07k39X0i2b3KVbebZCOiKi2GcX0At 9EOVpYdGH8ut3EGIVt4OuNJyvo63TsV8B+ZDmBCSmzGMDI5HwYoO+TXvB X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IH+5x9DuKFx9PMoW08FbBeZtXn84JaYEDOdb8DYH7O2d5sqqNiM+uDN2bMJC7MuYFmvHxIQtw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:a8a:b0:771:ec42:1c1e with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-77612168e3emr3844530b3a.16.1757695319263; Fri, 12 Sep 2025 09:41:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from sidongui-MacBookPro.local ([175.195.128.78]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-77607b17e23sm5970153b3a.55.2025.09.12.09.41.55 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 12 Sep 2025 09:41:58 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 01:41:44 +0900 From: Sidong Yang To: Caleb Sander Mateos Cc: Jens Axboe , Daniel Almeida , Benno Lossin , Miguel Ojeda , Arnd Bergmann , Greg Kroah-Hartman , rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/5] io_uring/cmd: zero-init pdu in io_uring_cmd_prep() to avoid UB Message-ID: References: <20250822125555.8620-1-sidong.yang@furiosa.ai> <20250822125555.8620-3-sidong.yang@furiosa.ai> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: rust-for-linux@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Tue, Sep 09, 2025 at 09:32:37AM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > On Tue, Sep 9, 2025 at 7:43 AM Sidong Yang wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 08, 2025 at 12:45:58PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 6, 2025 at 7:28 AM Sidong Yang wrote: > > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 02, 2025 at 08:31:00AM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 3:23 AM Sidong Yang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Sep 01, 2025 at 05:34:28PM -0700, Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 22, 2025 at 5:56 AM Sidong Yang wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The pdu field in io_uring_cmd may contain stale data when a request > > > > > > > > object is recycled from the slab cache. Accessing uninitialized or > > > > > > > > garbage memory can lead to undefined behavior in users of the pdu. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ensure the pdu buffer is cleared during io_uring_cmd_prep() so that > > > > > > > > each command starts from a well-defined state. This avoids exposing > > > > > > > > uninitialized memory and prevents potential misinterpretation of data > > > > > > > > from previous requests. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > No functional change is intended other than guaranteeing that pdu is > > > > > > > > always zero-initialized before use. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Sidong Yang > > > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > io_uring/uring_cmd.c | 1 + > > > > > > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > diff --git a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c > > > > > > > > index 053bac89b6c0..2492525d4e43 100644 > > > > > > > > --- a/io_uring/uring_cmd.c > > > > > > > > +++ b/io_uring/uring_cmd.c > > > > > > > > @@ -203,6 +203,7 @@ int io_uring_cmd_prep(struct io_kiocb *req, const struct io_uring_sqe *sqe) > > > > > > > > if (!ac) > > > > > > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > > > > > ioucmd->sqe = sqe; > > > > > > > > + memset(&ioucmd->pdu, 0, sizeof(ioucmd->pdu)); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Adding this overhead to every existing uring_cmd() implementation is > > > > > > > unfortunate. Could we instead track the initialized/uninitialized > > > > > > > state by using different types on the Rust side? The io_uring_cmd > > > > > > > could start as an IoUringCmd, where the PDU field is MaybeUninit, > > > > > > > write_pdu() could return a new IoUringCmdPdu that guarantees the > > > > > > > PDU has been initialized. > > > > > > > > > > > > I've found a flag IORING_URING_CMD_REISSUE that we could initialize > > > > > > the pdu. In uring_cmd callback, we can fill zero when it's not reissued. > > > > > > But I don't know that we could call T::default() in miscdevice. If we > > > > > > make IoUringCmdPdu, MiscDevice also should be MiscDevice. > > > > > > > > > > > > How about assign a byte in pdu for checking initialized? In uring_cmd(), > > > > > > We could set a byte flag that it's not initialized. And we could return > > > > > > error that it's not initialized in read_pdu(). > > > > > > > > > > Could we do the zero-initialization (or T::default()) in > > > > > MiscdeviceVTable::uring_cmd() if the IORING_URING_CMD_REISSUE flag > > > > > isn't set (i.e. on the initial issue)? That way, we avoid any > > > > > performance penalty for the existing C uring_cmd() implementations. > > > > > I'm not quite sure what you mean by "assign a byte in pdu for checking > > > > > initialized". > > > > > > > > Sure, we could fill zero when it's the first time uring_cmd called with > > > > checking the flag. I would remove this commit for next version. I also > > > > suggests that we would provide the method that read_pdu() and write_pdu(). > > > > In read_pdu() I want to check write_pdu() is called before. So along the > > > > 20 bytes for pdu, maybe we could use a bytes for the flag that pdu is > > > > initialized? > > > > > > Not sure what you mean about "20 bytes for pdu". > > > It seems like it would be preferable to enforce that write_pdu() has > > > been called before read_pdu() using the Rust type system instead of a > > > runtime check. I was thinking a signature like fn write_pdu(cmd: > > > IoUringCmd, value: T) -> IoUringCmdPdu. Do you feel there's a > > > reason that wouldn't work and a runtime check would be necessary? > > > > I didn't think about make write_pdu() to return IoUringCmdPdu before. > > I think it's good way to pdu is safe without adding a new generic param for > > MiscDevice. write_pdu() would return IoUringCmdPdu and it could call > > IoUringCmdPdu::pdu(&mut self) -> &mut T safely maybe. > > Yes, that's what I was thinking. Good, I'll change api in this way. Thanks! > > > > > > > > > > > > > > But maybe I would introduce a new struct that has Pin<&mut IoUringCmd> and > > > > issue_flags. How about some additional field for pdu is initialized like below? > > > > > > > > struct IoUringCmdArgs { > > > > ioucmd: Pin<&mut IoUringCmd>, > > > > issue_flags: u32, > > > > pdu_initialized: bool, > > > > } > > > > > > One other thing I realized is that issue_flags should come from the > > > *current* context rather than the context the uring_cmd() callback was > > > called in. For example, if io_uring_cmd_done() is called from task > > > work context, issue_flags should match the issue_flags passed to the > > > io_uring_cmd_tw_t callback, not the issue_flags originally passed to > > > the uring_cmd() callback. So it probably makes more sense to decouple > > > issue_flags from the (owned) IoUringCmd. I think you could pass it by > > > reference (&IssueFlags) or with a phantom reference lifetime > > > (IssueFlags<'_>) to the Rust uring_cmd() and task work callbacks to > > > ensure it can't be used after those callbacks have returned. > > > > I have had no idea about task work context. I agree with you that > > it would be better to separate issue_flags from IoUringCmd. So, > > IoUringCmdArgs would have a only field Pin<&mut IoUringCmd>? > > "Task work" is a mechanism io_uring uses to queue work to run on the > thread that submitted an io_uring operation. It's basically a > per-thread atomic queue of callbacks that the thread will process > whenever it returns from the kernel to userspace (after a syscall or > an interrupt). This is the context where asynchronous uring_cmd > completions are generally processed (see > io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task() and io_uring_cmd_do_in_task_lazy()). I > can't speak to the history of why io_uring uses task work, but my > guess would be that it provides a safe context to acquire the > io_ring_ctx uring_lock mutex (e.g. nvme_uring_cmd_end_io() can be > called from an interrupt handler, so it's not allowed to take a > mutex). Processing all the task work at once also provides natural > opportunities for batching. Thanks, I've checked io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task() that it receives callback that has issue_flags different with io_uring_cmd(). I'll try to add a api that wrapping io_uring_cmd_complete_in_task() for next version. > > Yes, we probably don't need to bundle anything else with the > IoUringCmd after all. As I mentioned earlier, I don't think Pin<&mut > IoUringCmd> will work for uring_cmds that complete asynchronously, as > they will need to outlive the uring_cmd() call. So uring_cmd() needs > to transfer ownership of the struct io_uring_cmd. I can't think that how to take ownership of struct io_uring_cmd. The struct allocated with io_alloc_req() and should be freed with io_free_req(). If taking ownership means having pointer of struct io_uring_cmd, I think it's no difference with current version. Also could it be called with mem::forget() if it has ownership? Thanks, Sidong > Best, > Caleb