On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 03:54:25PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 20, 2020 at 12:04 PM David Howells <dhowells@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Jann Horn <jannh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > > > +int fsinfo_string(const char *s, struct fsinfo_context *ctx)
> > > ...
> > > Please add a check here to ensure that "ret" actually fits into the
> > > buffer (and use WARN_ON() if you think the check should never fire).
> > > Otherwise I think this is too fragile.
> >
> > How about:
> >
> > int fsinfo_string(const char *s, struct fsinfo_context *ctx)
> > {
> > unsigned int len;
> > char *p = ctx->buffer;
> > int ret = 0;
> > if (s) {
> > len = strlen(s);
> > if (len > ctx->buf_size - 1)
> > len = ctx->buf_size;
> > if (!ctx->want_size_only) {
> > memcpy(p, s, len);
> > p[len] = 0;
>
> I think this is off-by-one? If len was too big, it is set to
> ctx->buf_size, so in that case this effectively becomes
> `ctx->buffer[ctx->buf_size] = 0`, which is one byte out of bounds,
> right?
>
> Maybe use something like `len = min_t(size_t, strlen(s), ctx->buf_size-1)` ?
>
> Looks good apart from that, I think.
>
> > }
> > ret = len;
> > }
> > return ret;
> > }
> [...]
> > > > + return ctx->usage;
> > >
> > > It is kind of weird that you have to return the ctx->usage everywhere
> > > even though the caller already has ctx...
> >
> > At this point, it's only used and returned by fsinfo_attributes() and really
> > is only for the use of the attribute getter function.
> >
> > I could, I suppose, return the amount of data in ctx->usage and then preset it
> > for VSTRUCT-type objects. Unfortunately, I can't make the getter return void
> > since it might have to return an error.
>
> Yeah, then you'd be passing around the error separately from the
> length... I don't know whether that'd make things better or worse.
>
> [...]
> > > > +struct fsinfo_attribute {
> > > > + unsigned int attr_id; /* The ID of the attribute */
> > > > + enum fsinfo_value_type type:8; /* The type of the attribute's value(s) */
> > > > + unsigned int flags:8;
> > > > + unsigned int size:16; /* - Value size (FSINFO_STRUCT) */
> > > > + unsigned int element_size:16; /* - Element size (FSINFO_LIST) */
> > > > + int (*get)(struct path *path, struct fsinfo_context *params);
> > > > +};
> > >
> > > Why the bitfields? It doesn't look like that's going to help you much,
> > > you'll just end up with 6 bytes of holes on x86-64:
> >
> > Expanding them to non-bitfields will require an extra 10 bytes, making the
> > struct 8 bytes bigger with 4 bytes of padding. I can do that if you'd rather.
>
> Wouldn't this still have the same total size?
>
> struct fsinfo_attribute {
> unsigned int attr_id; /* 0x0-0x3 */
> enum fsinfo_value_type type; /* 0x4-0x7 */
> u8 flags; /* 0x8-0x8 */
> /* 1-byte hole */
> u16 size; /* 0xa-0xb */
> u16 element_size; /* 0xc-0xd */
> /* 2-byte hole */
> int (*get)(...); /* 0x10-0x18 */
> };
>
> But it's not like I really care about this detail all that much, feel
> free to leave it as-is.
I was thinking, why not just have unsigned int flags from the start?
That replaces the padding holes with usable flag space, though I guess
this is in-core only so I'm not that passionate. I doubt we're going to
have millions of fsinfo attributes. :)
--D
