[lkml]   [2020]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 8/9] x86: kvm_hv_set_msr(): use __put_user() instead of 32bit __clear_user()
On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:20:54PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, May 30, 2020 at 12:14 PM Al Viro <> wrote:
> >
> > > And none of that code verifies that the end result is a user address.
> >
> > kvm_is_error_hva() is
> > return addr >= PAGE_OFFSET;
> Ahh, that's what I missed. It won't work on other architectures, but
> within x86 it's fine.

FWIW, we use virt/kvm on x86, powerpc, mips, s390 and arm64.

For x86 and powerpc the check is, AFAICS, OK (ppc kernel might start
higher than PAGE_OFFSET, but not lower than it). For arm64... not
sure - I'm not familiar with the virtual address space layout we use
there. mips does *NOT* get that protection at all - there kvm_is_error_hva()
is IS_ERR_VALUE() (thus the "at least on non-mips" upthread). And
for s390 it's also IS_ERR_VALUE(), but that's an separate can of worms -
there access_ok() is constant true; if we ever hit any of that code in
virt/kvm while under KERNEL_DS, we are well and truly fucked there.

 \ /
  Last update: 2020-05-30 21:42    [W:0.090 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site