lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Nov]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [patches][RFC] situation with csum_and_copy_... API
From
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2014 19:40:53 +0000

> On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 08:47:45AM +0000, Al Viro wrote:
>
>> I do have a patch doing just that; the question is what to do with csum-and-copy
>> primitives. Originally I planned to simply strip those access_ok() from those
>> (both the explicit calls and use of copy_from_user() where we ought to use
>> __copy_from_user(), etc.), but that's not nice to potential out-of-tree callers
>> of those suckers. If any of those exist and manage to cope with the wonderful
>> calling conventions, that is. As it is, we have the total of 4 callers of
>> csum_and_copy_from_user() and 2 callers of csum_and_copy_to_user(), all in
>> networking code. Do we care about potential out-of-tree users existing and
>> getting screwed by such change? Davem, Linus?
>
> FWIW, the beginning of series in question follows; removal of those
> access_ok() is 3/5. The series is longer than that (see vfs.git#iov_iter-net
> for a bit more, and there's more stuff in local queue still too much in flux
> to push them out), but all the stuff relevant to validating iovecs on
> sendmsg/recvmsg and getting rid of excessive access_ok() is in the first 5
> commits.

Al I really like this series, especially patch #2.

Sorry for taking so long to review this, I just wanted to make sure we
got this right.

Can you give me a pull request for just these 5 patches? Then feel free
to post the next batch for review, I'm eager to see it as are others.

Thanks!


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-11-19 21:41    [W:1.038 / U:0.436 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site