Re: [PATCH] riscv: fix __user annotation in traps_misaligned.c

[Clément Léger]

Hi Ben,

I sent a similar patch two days ago
(https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20231122135141.2936663-1-cleger@xxxxxxxxxxxx/).

On 23/11/2023 15:16, Ben Dooks wrote:
> The instruction reading code can read from either user or kernel addresses
> and thus the use of __user on pointers to instructions depends on which
> context. Fix a few sparse warnings by using __user for user-accesses and
> remove it when not.
> 
> Fixes:
> 
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:361:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:373:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:381:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:322:24: warning: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:322:24:    expected unsigned char const [noderef] __user *__gu_ptr
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:322:24:    got unsigned char const [usertype] *addr
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:361:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:373:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:381:21: warning: dereference of noderef expression
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:332:24: warning: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:332:24:    expected unsigned char [noderef] __user *__gu_ptr
> arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c:332:24:    got unsigned char [usertype] *addr
> 
> Fixes: 7c83232161f60 ("riscv: add support for misaligned trap handling in S-mode")
> Signed-off-by: Ben Dooks <ben.dooks@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> index 5eba37147caa..446e3d4eeea9 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/traps_misaligned.c
> @@ -319,7 +319,7 @@ static inline int get_insn(struct pt_regs *regs, ulong mepc, ulong *r_insn)
>  static inline int load_u8(struct pt_regs *regs, const u8 *addr, u8 *r_val)
>  {
>  	if (user_mode(regs)) {
> -		return __get_user(*r_val, addr);
> +		return __get_user(*r_val, (u8 __user *)addr);
>  	} else {
>  		*r_val = *addr;
>  		return 0;
> @@ -329,7 +329,7 @@ static inline int load_u8(struct pt_regs *regs, const u8 *addr, u8 *r_val)
>  static inline int store_u8(struct pt_regs *regs, u8 *addr, u8 val)
>  {
>  	if (user_mode(regs)) {
> -		return __put_user(val, addr);
> +		return __put_user(val, (u8 __user *)addr);
>  	} else {
>  		*addr = val;
>  		return 0;
> @@ -343,7 +343,7 @@ static inline int store_u8(struct pt_regs *regs, u8 *addr, u8 val)
>  	if (user_mode(regs)) {				\
>  		__ret = __get_user(insn, insn_addr);	\
>  	} else {					\
> -		insn = *insn_addr;			\
> +		insn = *(__force u16 *)insn_addr;	\

__read_insn() is called with either a u32 or a u16 pointer which is why
this macros did not used a specific type. Doing so would result in
loading half of what is needed. My patch addresses that.

Thanks

>  		__ret = 0;				\
>  	}						\
>  							\