Received: by 2002:a05:6a10:22f:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id 15csp2156928pxk; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:11:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxirJRg4tl4rgqRV+Ih2j2v4yijNUYT3OT0r4KmOzBd2rEJWPsWXStXvJi96LElzy0utDoZ X-Received: by 2002:a50:fb98:: with SMTP id e24mr44794632edq.130.1600553491006; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:11:31 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1600553490; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=thQ+6Z0cEAzvpwVgrf2OWYrgYx0HQ7/PCVJWKrrbX6/TByize9BBbUbjAlV0eoVO/R 3EyB66NXwYvRjEWEyl45yruhhJELYUNd1S5KNdlNfdve62J/cxv7cvNSqE44jl+KvkkO RkwehFjWDPNyR+8hfPJ/FLWDPsWOUOpcx3tm//nfW2AipgOWThrr/AvDEQU0S5J6Bdr4 KAlGVyJLGQvYrQCe5GPiKBr0m6b/RD3nLoakwTmkrO+Ylp74hTmcs5g0/IQ/hbEksVxQ a/qn5ABgDe4gbUsV9W6gmG533zbYEQsJcMB/6OC9XBSBzlgrfwdCoi9f8GPHAeZV1LdQ 9iUQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:in-reply-to:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=ZKC+GfyMv3tinWrA75fjA6I/HzMVGfhi3EIGpxKXTSI=; b=MyJrkjGoaDRbAbthABPkwblN5bkLNYUuHwz5j1jXjNQxrk452a+TMnrajnC5+wRoLZ 5MZ5HSX2SzTAfcvWpBMlnv2aIxPGXHry7//b0uRQN51qQ2TAYyHeN9ehCahyu1bpSPVl QhxF67XNNATwswoFTQL334Z9IQhV3uF9D6/Fgr8BknBulZyPzHk4vSn93/Rbsx4olk5R h7n4RgrVinS6tIh8GXhORiL3QOOIRcuNf91u5J3rqBYSsC3SYUXB+88QX0UNpkogatol KGMuTqgUhKnrzkBbPY9fQ+OUK6JmDNOSjl1Ppq4XbRXTan798IPwauLh+wVJzdCxsXTa tnAA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [23.128.96.18]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id t5si5656054edi.523.2020.09.19.15.10.55; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:11:30 -0700 (PDT) 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; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726760AbgISWJd (ORCPT + 99 others); Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:09:33 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38524 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726582AbgISWJc (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2020 18:09:32 -0400 Received: from ZenIV.linux.org.uk (zeniv.linux.org.uk [IPv6:2002:c35c:fd02::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4961DC0613CE; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 15:09:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from viro by ZenIV.linux.org.uk with local (Exim 4.92.3 #3 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1kJl2m-001ygq-2b; Sat, 19 Sep 2020 22:09:20 +0000 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2020 23:09:20 +0100 From: Al Viro To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Andrew Morton , Jens Axboe , Arnd Bergmann , David Howells , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mips@vger.kernel.org, linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-aio@kvack.org, io-uring@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, keyrings@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] kernel: add a PF_FORCE_COMPAT flag Message-ID: <20200919220920.GI3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <20200918124533.3487701-1-hch@lst.de> <20200918124533.3487701-2-hch@lst.de> <20200918134012.GY3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200918134406.GA17064@lst.de> <20200918135822.GZ3421308@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> <20200918151615.GA23432@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200918151615.GA23432@lst.de> Sender: Al Viro Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 05:16:15PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Sep 18, 2020 at 02:58:22PM +0100, Al Viro wrote: > > Said that, why not provide a variant that would take an explicit > > "is it compat" argument and use it there? And have the normal > > one pass in_compat_syscall() to that... > > That would help to not introduce a regression with this series yes. > But it wouldn't fix existing bugs when io_uring is used to access > read or write methods that use in_compat_syscall(). One example that > I recently ran into is drivers/scsi/sg.c. So screw such read/write methods - don't use them with io_uring. That, BTW, is one of the reasons I'm sceptical about burying the decisions deep into the callchain - we don't _want_ different data layouts on read/write depending upon the 32bit vs. 64bit caller, let alone the pointer-chasing garbage that is /dev/sg.