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:   Sun, 1 Nov 2020 16:01:03 -0500
From:   Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>
To:     Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com>
Cc:     Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>,
        Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>,
        linux-x86_64@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
        X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] x86: Fix x32 System V message queue syscalls
Message-ID: <20201101210102.GO534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
References: <1156938F-A9A3-4EE9-B059-2294A0B9FBFE@jrtc27.com>
 <20201012134444.1905-1-jrtc27@jrtc27.com>
 <CALCETrWKwFD7QhFQu9X_yQeVW1_yy-gEMNEtsWmQK=fNg9y68A@mail.gmail.com>
 <20201101012202.GM534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <7842A462-0ADB-4EE3-B4CB-AE6DCD70CE1C@jrtc27.com>
 <20201101015013.GN534@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <CALCETrUuBR3Pt_9NhRZTLzjZzwdsS2OPW4U2r31_1Uq-=poRDw@mail.gmail.com>
 <04832096-ED7F-4754-993D-F578D4A90843@jrtc27.com>
 <EEC90B2F-E972-475F-B058-918CDE401618@jrtc27.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <EEC90B2F-E972-475F-B058-918CDE401618@jrtc27.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Precedence: bulk

On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 06:27:10PM +0000, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> On 1 Nov 2020, at 18:15, Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On 1 Nov 2020, at 18:07, Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org> wrote:
> >> 
> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 6:50 PM Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>> On Sun, Nov 01, 2020 at 01:27:35AM +0000, Jessica Clarke wrote:
> >>>> On 1 Nov 2020, at 01:22, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 04:30:44PM -0700, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> >>>>>> cc: some libc folks
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> On Mon, Oct 12, 2020 at 6:45 AM Jessica Clarke <jrtc27@jrtc27.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> POSIX specifies that the first field of the supplied msgp, namely mtype,
> >>>>>>> is a long, not a __kernel_long_t, and it's a user-defined struct due to
> >>>>>>> the variable-length mtext field so we can't even bend the spec and make
> >>>>>>> it a __kernel_long_t even if we wanted to. Thus we must use the compat
> >>>>>>> syscalls on x32 to avoid buffer overreads and overflows in msgsnd and
> >>>>>>> msgrcv respectively.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> This is a mess.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> include/uapi/linux/msg.h has:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> /* message buffer for msgsnd and msgrcv calls */
> >>>>>> struct msgbuf {
> >>>>>>      __kernel_long_t mtype;          /* type of message */
> >>>>>>      char mtext[1];                  /* message text */
> >>>>>> };
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Your test has:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> struct msg_long {
> >>>>>>  long mtype;
> >>>>>>  char mtext[8];
> >>>>>> };
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> struct msg_long_ext {
> >>>>>>  struct msg_long msg_long;
> >>>>>>  char mext[4];
> >>>>>> };
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> and I'm unclear as to exactly what you're trying to do there with the
> >>>>>> "mext" part.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> POSIX says:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>     The application shall ensure that the argument msgp points to  a  user-
> >>>>>>     defined  buffer that contains first a field of type long specifying the
> >>>>>>     type of the message, and then a data portion that holds the data  bytes
> >>>>>>     of the message. The structure below is an example of what this user-de‐
> >>>>>>     fined buffer might look like:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>         struct mymsg {
> >>>>>>             long   mtype;       /* Message type. */
> >>>>>>             char   mtext[1];    /* Message text. */
> >>>>>>         }
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> NTP has this delightful piece of code:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 44 typedef union {
> >>>>>> 45   struct msgbuf msgp;
> >>>>>> 46   struct {
> >>>>>> 47     long mtype;
> >>>>>> 48     int code;
> >>>>>> 49     struct timeval tv;
> >>>>>> 50   } msgb;
> >>>>>> 51 } MsgBuf;
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> bluefish has:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> struct small_msgbuf {
> >>>>>> long mtype;
> >>>>>> char mtext[MSQ_QUEUE_SMALL_SIZE];
> >>>>>> } small_msgp;
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> My laptop has nothing at all in /dev/mqueue.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> So I don't really know what the right thing to do is.  Certainly if
> >>>>>> we're going to apply this patch, we should also fix the header.  I
> >>>>>> almost think we should *delete* struct msgbuf from the headers, since
> >>>>>> it's all kinds of busted, but that will break the NTP build.  Ideally
> >>>>>> we would go back in time and remove it from the headers.
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Libc people, any insight?  We can probably fix the bug without
> >>>>>> annoying anyone given how lightly x32 is used and how lightly POSIX
> >>>>>> message queues are used.
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> If it's that outright wrong and always has been, I feel like the old
> >>>>> syscall numbers should just be deprecated and new ones assigned.
> >>>>> Otherwise, there's no way for userspace to be safe against data
> >>>>> corruption when run on older kernels. If there's a new syscall number,
> >>>>> libc can just use the new one unconditionally (giving ENOSYS on
> >>>>> kernels where it would be broken) or have a x32-specific
> >>>>> implementation that makes the old syscall and performs translation if
> >>>>> the new one fails with ENOSYS.
> >>>> 
> >>>> That doesn't really help broken code continue to work reliably, as
> >>>> upgrading libc will just pull in the new syscall for a binary that's
> >>>> expecting the broken behaviour, unless you do symbol versioning, but
> >>>> then it'll just break when you next recompile the code, and there's no
> >>>> way for that to be diagnosed given the *application* has to define the
> >>>> type. But given it's application-defined I really struggle to see how
> >>>> any code out there is actually expecting the current x32 behaviour as
> >>>> you'd have to go really out of your way to find out that x32 is broken
> >>>> and needs __kernel_long_t. I don't think there's any way around just
> >>>> technically breaking ABI whilst likely really fixing ABI in 99.999% of
> >>>> cases (maybe 100%).
> >>> 
> >>> I'm not opposed to "breaking ABI" here because the current syscall
> >>> doesn't work unless someone wrote bogus x32-specific code to work
> >>> around it being wrong. I don't particularly want to preserve any of
> >>> the current behavior.
> >>> 
> >>> What I am somewhat opposed to is making a situation where an updated
> >>> libc can't be safe against getting run on a kernel with a broken
> >>> version of the syscall and silently corrupting data. I'm flexible
> >>> about how avoiding tha tis achieved.
> >> 
> >> If we're sufficiently confident that we won't regress anything by
> >> fixing the bug, I propose we do the following.  First, we commit a fix
> >> that's Jessica's patch plus a fix to struct msghdr, and we mark that
> >> for -stable.  Then we commit another patch that removes 'struct
> >> msghdr' from uapi entirely, but we don't mark that for -stable.  If
> >> people complain about the latter, we revert it.
> > 
> > Thinking about this more, MIPS n32 is also affected by that header. In
> > fact the n32 syscalls currently do the right thing and use the compat
> > implementations, so the header is currently out-of-sync with the kernel
> > there*. This should be noted when committing the change to msg.h.
> 
> Never mind, it seems MIPS n32 is weird and leaves __kernel_long_t as a
> normal long despite being an ILP32-on-64-bit ABI, I guess because it's
> inherited from IRIX rather than being invented by the GNU world.

Yes, the whole __kernel_long_t invention is largely x32-only (maybe
theoretically on aarch64-ilp32 too? if that even really exists?) and
is pretty much entirely a mistake from lacking the proper
infrastructure to do time64 when x32 was introduced (note that n32 has
32-bit old-time_t). I hope effort will be made to keep the same
mistake from creeping into future ilp32-on-64 ABIs if there are any.

Rich