Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20191007025046.GL26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=whraNSys_Lj=Ut1EA=CJEfw2Uothh+5-WL+7nDJBegWcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=witTXMGsc9ZAK4hnKnd_O7u8b1eiou-6cfjt4aOcWvruQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191008032912.GQ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=wiAyZmsEp6oQQgHiuaDU0bLj=OVHSGV_OfvHRSXNPYABw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHk-=wgOWxqwqCFuP_Bw=Hxxf9njeHJs0OLNGNc63peNd=kRqw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191010195504.GI26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=wgWRQo0m7TUCK4T_J-3Vqte+p-FWzvT3CB1jJHgX-KctA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191011001104.GJ26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <CAHk-=wgg3jzkk-jObm1FLVYGS8JCTiKppEnA00_QX7Wsm5ieLQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20191013181333.GK26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <20191013181333.GK26530@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:43:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wgrWGyACBM8N8KP7Pu_2VopuzM4A12yQz6Eo=X2Jpwzcw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to unsafe_put_user()
To:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Oct 13, 2019 at 11:13 AM Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Umm...  TBH, I wonder if we would be better off if restore_sigcontext()
> (i.e. sigreturn()/rt_sigreturn()) would flat-out copy_from_user() the
> entire[*] struct sigcontext into a local variable and then copied fields
> to pt_regs...

Probably ok., We've generally tried to avoid state that big on the
stack, but you're right that it's shallow.

> Same for do_sys_vm86(), perhaps.
>
> And these (32bit and 64bit restore_sigcontext() and do_sys_vm86())
> are the only get_user_ex() users anywhere...

Yeah, that sounds like a solid strategy for getting rid of them.

Particularly since we can't really make get_user_ex() generate
particularly good code (at least for now).

Now, put_user_ex() is a different thing - converting it to
unsafe_put_user() actually does make it generate very good code - much
better than copying data twice.

               Linus