Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 26 Aug 2008 21:31:00 -0700 | From | Zev Weiss <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] [MTD] mtdchar.c: Fix regression in MEMGETREGIONINFO ioctl() |
| |
Zev Weiss wrote: > Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Aug 2008 01:10:21 -0700 Zev Weiss <zevweiss@gmail.com> wrote: > > > >> Hmm. Well, I may be misunderstanding what you're saying (again, I'm > very much > >> a newbie to kernelspace), but I *think* the "copying four u32's out to > >> userspace" thing isn't really a problem with my patch. It does > certainly copy > >> those four u32's, but given that `ur' (struct mtd_region_info_user) is > >> initialized by copying from userspace, its fourth u32 (the > `regionindex' > >> member) should be identical when copied back out to userspace, given > that it's > >> not touched in the memberwise modification of the struct. > > > > OK, that's fortuitously bug-free in single-threaded userspace but > > fantastically-improbably-buggy if userspace is threaded. > > > > But it's something the kernel shouldn't be doing. > > > > Ah, good point -- that hadn't occurred to me at all. Though it looks > pretty > clumsy/simpleminded to me, I guess something like this would avoid > copying and rewriting the fourth u32 ("Well, duh" may be the appropriate > response here): > > diff --git a/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c b/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c > index 13cc67a..424f318 100644 > --- a/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c > +++ b/drivers/mtd/mtdchar.c > @@ -410,16 +410,20 @@ static int mtd_ioctl(struct inode *inode, struct > file *file, > > case MEMGETREGIONINFO: > { > - struct region_info_user ur; > + u32 ur_idx; > + struct mtd_erase_region_info *kr; > + struct region_info_user *ur = (struct region_info_user > *) argp; > > - if (copy_from_user(&ur, argp, sizeof(struct > region_info_user))) > + if (get_user(ur_idx,&(ur->regionindex))) > return -EFAULT; > > - if (ur.regionindex >= mtd->numeraseregions) > - return -EINVAL; > - if (copy_to_user(argp, > &(mtd->eraseregions[ur.regionindex]), > - sizeof(struct mtd_erase_region_info))) > + kr = &(mtd->eraseregions[ur_idx]); > + > + if (put_user(kr->offset, &(ur->offset)) > + || put_user(kr->erasesize, &(ur->erasesize)) > + || put_user(kr->numblocks, &(ur->numblocks))) > return -EFAULT; > + > break; > } > > > [Note: this is not even so much as compile-tested, and will remain that way > until Monday, but I think you get the picture.] >
Well, for what little it's probably worth, I've now tested this patch, with no resulting surprises (seems to work fine for me). Though I see now that, much to my chagrin, something in my email chain seems to have spacified my code. If there's any need I can resend appropriately.
Zev
| |