On 14/09/17 19:39, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>
>
> 14.09.2017 13:29, Ian Kent пишет:
>> On 14/09/17 17:24, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> 14.09.2017 02:38, Ian Kent пишет:
>>>> On 01/09/17 19:21, Stanislav Kinsburskiy wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Kinsburskiy <skinsbursky@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h | 3 +++
>>>>> fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c | 3 +++
>>>>> fs/autofs4/inode.c | 4 +++-
>>>>> 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h b/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
>>>>> index 4737615..3da105f 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
>>>>> +++ b/fs/autofs4/autofs_i.h
>>>>> @@ -120,6 +120,9 @@ struct autofs_sb_info {
>>>>> struct list_head active_list;
>>>>> struct list_head expiring_list;
>>>>> struct rcu_head rcu;
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>>>>> + unsigned is32bit:1;
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> };
>>>>>
>>>>> static inline struct autofs_sb_info *autofs4_sbi(struct super_block *sb)
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
>>>>> index b7c816f..467d6c4 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/autofs4/dev-ioctl.c
>>>>> @@ -397,6 +397,9 @@ static int autofs_dev_ioctl_setpipefd(struct file *fp,
>>>>> sbi->pipefd = pipefd;
>>>>> sbi->pipe = pipe;
>>>>> sbi->catatonic = 0;
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>>>>> + sbi->is32bit = is_compat_task();
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> }
>>>>> out:
>>>>> put_pid(new_pid);
>>>>> diff --git a/fs/autofs4/inode.c b/fs/autofs4/inode.c
>>>>> index 09e7d68..21d3c0b 100644
>>>>> --- a/fs/autofs4/inode.c
>>>>> +++ b/fs/autofs4/inode.c
>>>>> @@ -301,7 +301,9 @@ int autofs4_fill_super(struct super_block *s, void *data, int silent)
>>>>> } else {
>>>>> sbi->oz_pgrp = get_task_pid(current, PIDTYPE_PGID);
>>>>> }
>>>>> -
>>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT
>>>>> + sbi->is32bit = is_compat_task();
>>>>> +#endif
>>>>> if (autofs_type_trigger(sbi->type))
>>>>> __managed_dentry_set_managed(root);
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not sure about this.
>>>>
>>>> Don't you think it would be better to avoid the in code #ifdefs by doing some
>>>> checks and defines in the header file and defining what's need to just use
>>>> is_compat_task().
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, might be...
>>>
>>>> Not sure 2 patches are needed for this either ......
>>>>
>>>
>>> Well, I found this issue occasionally.
>>
>> I'm wondering what the symptoms are?
>>
>
> Size of struct autofs_v5_packet is 300 bytes for x86 and 304 bytes for x86_64.
> Which means, that 32bit task can read more than size of autofs_v5_packet on 64bit kernel.
Are you sure?
Shouldn't that be a short read on the x86 side of a 4 bytes longer
structure on the x86_64 side.
I didn't think you could have a 64 bit client on a 32 bit kernel
so the converse (the read past end of struct) doesn't apply.
Ian
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe autofs" in
