Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sat, 12 Sep 2020 13:47:06 +0200
From:   Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To:     Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>
Cc:     andriin@fb.com, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        daniel@iogearbox.net, davem@davemloft.net, hawk@kernel.org,
        john.fastabend@gmail.com, kafai@fb.com, kpsingh@chromium.org,
        kuba@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Using a pointer and kzalloc in place of a struct directly
Message-ID: <20200912114706.GA171774@kroah.com>
References: <000000000000c82fe505aef233c6@google.com>
 <20200912113804.6465-1-anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200912113804.6465-1-anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 05:08:04PM +0530, Anant Thazhemadam wrote:
> Updated the usage of a struct variable directly, in bpf_link_get_info_by_fd
> to using a pointer of the same type instead, which points to a memory 
> location allocated using kzalloc.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Anant Thazhemadam <anant.thazhemadam@gmail.com>

Note, your "To:" line seemed corrupted, and why not cc: the bpf mailing
list as well?

Anyway, comment on your patch below:

> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 4108ef3b828b..01b9c203ef65 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -3605,30 +3605,31 @@ static int bpf_link_get_info_by_fd(struct file *file,
>  				  union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
>  {
>  	struct bpf_link_info __user *uinfo = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->info.info);
> -	struct bpf_link_info info;
> +	struct bpf_link_info *info = NULL;
>  	u32 info_len = attr->info.info_len;
>  	int err;
>  
> -	err = bpf_check_uarg_tail_zero(uinfo, sizeof(info), info_len);
> +	err = bpf_check_uarg_tail_zero(uinfo, sizeof(struct bpf_link_info), info_len);
> +
>  	if (err)
>  		return err;
>  	info_len = min_t(u32, sizeof(info), info_len);
>  
> -	memset(&info, 0, sizeof(info));
> -	if (copy_from_user(&info, uinfo, info_len))
> +	info = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_link_info), GFP_KERNEL);
> +	if (copy_from_user(info, uinfo, info_len))
>  		return -EFAULT;

You leaked memory :(

Did you test this patch?  Where do you free this memory, I don't see
that happening anywhere in this patch, did I miss it?

And odds are this change will slow things down, right?  Why make this
change, what's wrong with the structure being on the stack?

thanks,

greg k-h