Re: [PATCH v13 04/20] mm, arm64: untag user pointers passed to memory syscalls
From: Catalin Marinas
Date: Fri Mar 29 2019 - 06:30:50 EST
(I trimmed down the cc list a bit since it's always bouncing)
On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 02:19:34PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Mar 2019 19:10:07 +0100
> Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > ---
> > > > ipc/shm.c | 2 ++
> > > > mm/madvise.c | 2 ++
> > > > mm/mempolicy.c | 5 +++++
> > > > mm/migrate.c | 1 +
> > > > mm/mincore.c | 2 ++
> > > > mm/mlock.c | 5 +++++
> > > > mm/mmap.c | 7 +++++++
> > > > mm/mprotect.c | 1 +
> > > > mm/mremap.c | 2 ++
> > > > mm/msync.c | 2 ++
> > > > 10 files changed, 29 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > I wonder whether it's better to keep these as wrappers in the arm64
> > > code.
> >
> > I don't think I understand what you propose, could you elaborate?
>
> I believe Catalin is saying that instead of placing things like:
>
> @@ -1593,6 +1593,7 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE3(shmat, int, shmid, char __user *, shmaddr, int, shmflg)
> unsigned long ret;
> long err;
>
> + shmaddr = untagged_addr(shmaddr);
>
> To instead have the shmaddr set to the untagged_addr() before calling
> the system call, and passing the untagged addr to the system call, as
> that goes through the arm64 architecture specific code first.
Indeed. For example, we already have a SYSCALL_DEFINE6(mmap, ...) in
arch/arm64/kernel/sys.c, just add the untagging there. We could do
something similar for the other syscalls. I don't mind doing this in the
generic code but if it's only needed for arm64, I'd rather keep the
generic changes to a minimum.
(I had a hack overriding __SC_CAST to do this automatically for pointer
arguments but this wouldn't work on mmap() and friends as the argument
is unsigned long)
--
Catalin