Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756537AbaKSUZ7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:25:59 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:38387 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754598AbaKSUZ6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:25:58 -0500 Date: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 15:25:55 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20141119.152555.528973700550634768.davem@davemloft.net> To: viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patches][RFC] situation with csum_and_copy_... API From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20141118194053.GA14641@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20141118084745.GT7996@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20141118194053.GA14641@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.5 on Emacs 24.1 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Wed, 19 Nov 2014 12:25:57 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Al Viro 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! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/