On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 2:12 PM Joel Savitz <jsav...@redhat.com> wrote: > When PR_GET_TASK_SIZE is passed to prctl, the kernel will attempt to > copy the value of TASK_SIZE to the userspace address in arg2.
A commit message shouldn't just describe what you're doing, but also why you're doing it. Is this intended for processes that are running on X86-64 and want to determine whether the system supports 5-level paging, or something like that? > +static int prctl_get_tasksize(void __user *uaddr) > +{ > + unsigned long current_task_size, current_word_size; > + > + current_task_size = TASK_SIZE; > + current_word_size = sizeof(unsigned long); > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT > + /* On 64-bit architecture, we must check whether the current thread > + * is running in 32-bit compat mode. If it is, we can simply cut > + * the size in half. This avoids corruption of the userspace stack. > + */ > + if (test_thread_flag(TIF_ADDR32)) > + current_word_size >>= 1; > +#endif > + > + return copy_to_user(uaddr, ¤t_task_size, current_word_size) ? > -EFAULT : 0; > +} This function looks completely wrong; in particular, you're assuming that the architecture is little-endian. Make the value a u64, and you won't have these problems: static int prctl_get_tasksize(u64 __user *uaddr) { return put_user(TASK_SIZE, uaddr) ? -EFAULT : 0; } A bunch of other new pieces of userspace API already use "u64" to store userspace pointers and lengths to avoid compat issues. > @@ -2486,6 +2506,9 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(prctl, int, option, unsigned long, > arg2, unsigned long, arg3, > return -EINVAL; > error = PAC_RESET_KEYS(me, arg2); > break; > + case PR_GET_TASK_SIZE: > + error = prctl_get_tasksize((void *)arg2); s/void */void __user */