Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-85862-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 16:01:49 -0800
From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>,
	Vinod Koul <vkoul@kernel.org>,
	Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@linaro.org>,
	Jonathan Cameron <Jonathan.Cameron@huawei.com>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, dmaengine@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-iio@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-spi@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
	Jonathan Cameron <jic23@kernel.org>,
	Lars-Peter Clausen <lars@metafoo.de>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/8] net-device: Use new helpers from overflow.h in
 netdevice APIs
Message-ID: <202402281554.C1CEEF744@keescook>
References: <20240228204919.3680786-1-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <20240228204919.3680786-8-andriy.shevchenko@linux.intel.com>
 <202402281341.AC67EB6E35@keescook>
 <20240228144148.5c227487@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240228144148.5c227487@kernel.org>

On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 02:41:48PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Feb 2024 13:46:10 -0800 Kees Cook wrote:
> > I really don't like hiding these trailing allocations from the compiler.
> > Why can't something like this be done (totally untested):
> > 
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > index 118c40258d07..dae6df4fb177 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> > @@ -2475,6 +2475,8 @@ struct net_device {
> >  	/** @page_pools: page pools created for this netdevice */
> >  	struct hlist_head	page_pools;
> >  #endif
> > +	u32			priv_size;
> > +	u8			priv_data[] __counted_by(priv_size) __aligned(NETDEV_ALIGN);
> 
> I like, FWIW, please submit! :)

So, I found several cases where struct net_device is included in the
middle of another structure, which makes my proposal more awkward. But I
also don't understand why it's in the _middle_. Shouldn't it always be
at the beginning (with priv stuff following it?)
Quick search and examined manually: git grep 'struct net_device [a-z0-9_]*;'

struct rtw89_dev
struct ath10k
etc.

Some even have two included (?)

But I still like the idea -- Gustavo has been solving these cases with
having two structs, e.g.:

struct net_device {
	...unchanged...
};

struct net_device_alloc {
	struct net_device	dev;
	u32			priv_size;
	u8			priv_data[] __counted_by(priv_size) __aligned(NETDEV_ALIGN);
};

And internals can use struct net_device_alloc...

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook