On Thu, Jun 24, 2021 at 02:22:27PM +0100, Robin Murphy wrote:
> FWIW I think the only way to make the kernel behaviour any more robust here
> would be to make the whole uaccess API more expressive, such that rather
> than simply saying "I only got this far" it could actually differentiate
> between stopping due to a fault which may be recoverable and worth retrying,
> and one which definitely isn't.
... and propagate that "more expressive" information through what, 3 or 4
levels in the call chain?
>From include/linux/uaccess.h:
* If raw_copy_{to,from}_user(to, from, size) returns N, size - N bytes starting
* at to must become equal to the bytes fetched from the corresponding area
* starting at from. All data past to + size - N must be left unmodified.
*
* If copying succeeds, the return value must be 0. If some data cannot be
* fetched, it is permitted to copy less than had been fetched; the only
* hard requirement is that not storing anything at all (i.e. returning size)
* should happen only when nothing could be copied. In other words, you don't
* have to squeeze as much as possible - it is allowed, but not necessary.
arm64 instances violate the aforementioned hard requirement. Please, fix
it there; it's not hard. All you need is an exception handler in .Ltiny15
that would fall back to (short) byte-by-byte copy if the faulting address
happened to be unaligned. Or just do one-byte copy, not that it had been
considerably cheaper than a loop. Will be cheaper than propagating that extra
information up the call chain, let alone paying for extra ->write_begin()
and ->write_end() for single byte in generic_perform_write().
