On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 11:43:32AM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 10:18:47AM -0700, Dennis Dalessandro wrote:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_EP_INFO:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_EP_ERASE_CHIP:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_EP_ERASE_RANGE:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_EP_READ_RANGE:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_EP_WRITE_RANGE:
+ if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
+ return -EPERM;
+ if (copy_from_user(&ucmd,
+ (struct hfi11_cmd __user *)arg,
+ sizeof(ucmd)))
+ return -EFAULT;
+ return handle_eprom_command(fp, &ucmd);
I thought we agreed to get rid of this as well? It certainly does not
belong here, and as a general rule, I don't think ioctls should be
doing capable tests..
Yeah. I left it in this patch set because this just "ports" our existing
code to ioctl(). The eprom stuff is completely removed in another patch set
that I posted shortly after this. It's at:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-rdma&m=146307409301822&w=2
+static inline int check_ioctl_access(unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
+{
+ int read_cmd, write_cmd, read_ok, write_ok;
+
+ read_cmd = _IOC_DIR(cmd) & _IOC_READ;
+ write_cmd = _IOC_DIR(cmd) & _IOC_WRITE;
+ write_ok = access_ok(VERIFY_WRITE, (void __user *)arg, _IOC_SIZE(cmd));
+ read_ok = access_ok(VERIFY_READ, (void __user *)arg, _IOC_SIZE(cmd));
+
+ if ((read_cmd && !write_ok) || (write_cmd && !read_ok))
+ return -EFAULT;
This seems kind of goofy, didn't Ira say this is performance senstive?
I'll let Ira comment here on the performance aspect. I agree it looks goofy.
Suggestion on how to make it look better? Or are you saying this is
incorrect?
Driver shouldn't be open coding __get_user like that, IMHO.
Can you explain what you mean here? We should not use __get_user()?
+#define HFI1_IOCTL_RECV_CTRL \
+ _IOW(IB_IOCTL_MAGIC, HFI1_CMD_RECV_CTRL, int)
Have you audited this? Confused why this is marked IOW when I see
this:
+ case HFI1_IOCTL_RECV_CTRL:
+ ret = __get_user(uval, (int __user *)arg);
Seeing many other examples.
I stopped looking again
_IOW means user is writing data to the device. So the device is reading data
from the user. Or am I missing your point?
-Denny
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
