On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:31:53PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 07, 2014 at 10:11:14PM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
>
> > I'm looking through the tree right now; so far it looks like we can just
> > move those suckers to the point where we validate iovec and lose them
> > from low-level iovec and csum copying completely. I still haven't finished
> > tracing all possible paths for address to arrive at the points where we
> > currently check that stuff, but so far it looks very doable.
>
> BTW, csum side of that is also chock-full of duplicate access_ok() -
> e.g. generic csum_and_copy_from_user() checks before calling
> csum_partial_copy_from_user(). And generic instance of that is using
> __copy_from_user(), all right, but a _lot_ of non-default instances
> repeat that access_ok().
While we are at it: here's the default csum_and_copy_to_user()
static __inline__ __wsum csum_and_copy_to_user
(const void *src, void __user *dst, int len, __wsum sum, int *err_ptr)
{
sum = csum_partial(src, len, sum);
if (access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, dst, len)) {
if (copy_to_user(dst, src, len) == 0)
return sum;
}
if (len)
*err_ptr = -EFAULT;
return (__force __wsum)-1; /* invalid checksum */
}
Note that we do that access_ok() and follow it with copy_to_user() on exact
same range, i.e. repeat the same damn check...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
