On Wed, Oct 09, 2019 at 06:38:12PM -0700, Max Filippov wrote:
> There's also the following code in the callers of this macro, e.g. in
> __get_user_nocheck:
>
> long __gu_err, __gu_val; \
> __get_user_size(__gu_val, (ptr), (size), __gu_err); \
> (x) = (__force __typeof__(*(ptr)))__gu_val; \
>
> the last line is important for sizes 1..4, because it takes care of
> sign extension of the value loaded by the assembly.
> At the same time the first line doesn't make sense for the size 8
> as it will result in value truncation.
Right you are...
> + long __gu_err; \
> + __typeof__(*(ptr) + 0) __gu_val; \
What would __u64 __gu_val; end up with for smaller sizes? I don't have
xtensa cross-toolchain at the moment, so I can't check it easily;
what does =r constraint generate in such case?
Another thing is, you want to zero it on failure, to avoid an uninitialized
value ending up someplace interesting....
> @@ -198,7 +200,7 @@ do {
> \
> case 1: __get_user_asm(x, ptr, retval, 1, "l8ui", __cb); break;\
> case 2: __get_user_asm(x, ptr, retval, 2, "l16ui", __cb); break;\
> case 4: __get_user_asm(x, ptr, retval, 4, "l32i", __cb); break;\
> - case 8: retval = __copy_from_user(&x, ptr, 8); break; \
> + case 8: retval = __copy_from_user(&x, ptr, 8) ? -EFAULT : 0;
> break; \
> default: (x) = __get_user_bad(); \
> } \
> } while (0)
>
> Here __typeof__(*(ptr) + 0) makes enough room for all cases
> in the __get_user_size and the "+0" part takes care of pointers
> to const data.
