Skip to contentSkip to conversation

vfs: fix too big f_pos handling

PATCH In review Wu, Fengguang 3 participants 4 messages Jan 13, 2010 – Jan 14, 2010

Subsystems (4)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/8 vfs: fix too big f_pos handling

[CC fsdevel for opinions]

From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>

Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if negative, returns -EINVAL.

But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc.. has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write to the file(device).

This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file offsets.

Changelog: v4->v5
- clean up patches dor /dev/mem.
- rebased onto 2.6.32-rc1

Changelog: v3->v4
- make changes in mem.c aligned.
- change __negative_fpos_check() to return int.
- fixed bug in "pos" check.
- added comments.

Changelog: v2->v3
- fixed bug in rw_verify_area (it cannot be compiled)

---
 drivers/char/mem.c |    4 ++++
 fs/proc/base.c     |    2 ++
 fs/read_write.c    |   22 ++++++++++++++++++++--
 include/linux/fs.h |    2 ++
 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
fs/read_write.c +20 -2
@@ -205,6 +205,21 @@ bad:
 }
 #endif
 
+static int
+__negative_fpos_check(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, size_t count)
+{
+	/*
+	 * pos or pos+count is negative here, check overflow.
+	 * too big "count" will be caught in rw_verify_area().
+	 */
+	if ((pos < 0) && (pos + count < pos))
+		return -EOVERFLOW;
+	/* If !VERYBIG inode, negative pos(pos+count) is not allowed */
+	if (!IS_VERYBIG(inode))
+		return -EINVAL;
+	return 0;
+}
+
 /*
  * rw_verify_area doesn't like huge counts. We limit
  * them to something that fits in "int" so that others
@@ -222,8 +237,11 @@ int rw_verify_area(int read_write, struc
 	if (unlikely((ssize_t) count < 0))
 		return retval;
 	pos = *ppos;
-	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0))
-		return retval;
+	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0)) {
+		retval = __negative_fpos_check(inode, pos, count);
+		if (retval)
+			return retval;
+	}
 
 	if (unlikely(inode->i_flock && mandatory_lock(inode))) {
 		retval = locks_mandatory_area(
include/linux/fs.h +2 -0
@@ -235,6 +235,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
 #define S_NOCMTIME	128	/* Do not update file c/mtime */
 #define S_SWAPFILE	256	/* Do not truncate: swapon got its bmaps */
 #define S_PRIVATE	512	/* Inode is fs-internal */
+#define S_VERYBIG	1024	/* Inode is huge: treat loff_t as unsigned */
 
 /*
  * Note that nosuid etc flags are inode-specific: setting some file-system
@@ -269,6 +270,7 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
 #define IS_NOCMTIME(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_NOCMTIME)
 #define IS_SWAPFILE(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_SWAPFILE)
 #define IS_PRIVATE(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_PRIVATE)
+#define IS_VERYBIG(inode)	((inode)->i_flags & S_VERYBIG)
 
 /* the read-only stuff doesn't really belong here, but any other place is
    probably as bad and I don't want to create yet another include file. */
drivers/char/mem.c +4 -0
@@ -861,6 +861,10 @@ static int memory_open(struct inode *ino
 	if (dev->dev_info)
 		filp->f_mapping->backing_dev_info = dev->dev_info;
 
+	/* Is /dev/mem or /dev/kmem ? */
+	if (dev->dev_info == &directly_mappable_cdev_bdi)
+		inode->i_flags |= S_VERYBIG;
+
 	if (dev->fops->open)
 		return dev->fops->open(inode, filp);
 
fs/proc/base.c +2 -0
@@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ static const struct file_operations proc
 static int mem_open(struct inode* inode, struct file* file)
 {
 	file->private_data = (void*)((long)current->self_exec_id);
+	/* this file is read only and we can catch out-of-range */
+	inode->i_flags |= S_VERYBIG;
 	return 0;
 }
 

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>

maintainer
#1 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · Fengguang

From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>

Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if negative, returns -EINVAL.

But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc.. has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write to the file(device).

This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file offsets.

Ehh... FMODE_NEG_OFFSET in file->f_mode, perhaps?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>

#2 lore raw
Quoted 6 lines · On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:13:08 +0000 Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 5 lines · Fengguang

From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>

Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if negative, returns -EINVAL.

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 6 lines

But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc.. has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write to the file(device).

This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file offsets.

Ehh... FMODE_NEG_OFFSET in file->f_mode, perhaps?

Any method is okay for me.
I was just not sure where I could modify without problem. If modifing f_mode is allowed, I'll write new version.

Thank you for advice.

I'm sorry that I don't have enough time this week. So, I'll try next week. I think dropping this patch itself has no big influence to this patch set. (but debug will be harder ;)
Thanks,
-Kame

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>

#3 lore raw
Quoted 22 lines · KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki
Quoted 6 lines · On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 05:13:08 +0000 Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
Quoted 5 lines · Fengguang

From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>

Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if negative, returns -EINVAL.

Quoted 9 lines
Quoted 6 lines

But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc.. has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write to the file(device).

This patch introduce a flag S_VERYBIG and allow negative file offsets.

Ehh... FMODE_NEG_OFFSET in file->f_mode, perhaps?

Any method is okay for me.
I was just not sure where I could modify without problem. If modifing f_mode is allowed, I'll write new version.

Quoted 5 lines

Thank you for advice.

I'm sorry that I don't have enough time this week. So, I'll try next week. I think dropping this patch itself has no big influence to this patch set. (but debug will be harder ;)

I just added FMODE_RANDOM, so hands down to add another ;)

Here is the updated patch, I'd like to submit it in another series together with the FMODE_RANDOM patch.

Tested OK on /dev/kmem.

Thanks,
Fengguang
---
Subject: vfs: allow negative f_pos with FMODE_NEG_OFFSET

From: KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <[email protected]>

Now, rw_verify_area() checsk f_pos is negative or not. And if negative, returns -EINVAL.

But, some special files as /dev/(k)mem and /proc/<pid>/mem etc.. has negative offsets. And we can't do any access via read/write to the file(device).

So introduce FMODE_NEG_OFFSET to allow negative file offsets.

Changelog: v5->v6
- use FMODE_NEG_OFFSET (suggested by Al)
- rebased onto 2.6.33-rc1

Changelog: v4->v5
- clean up patches dor /dev/mem.
- rebased onto 2.6.32-rc1

Changelog: v3->v4
- make changes in mem.c aligned.
- change __negative_fpos_check() to return int.
- fixed bug in "pos" check.
- added comments.

Changelog: v2->v3
- fixed bug in rw_verify_area (it cannot be compiled)

---
 drivers/char/mem.c |    4 ++++
 fs/proc/base.c     |    2 ++
 fs/read_write.c    |   21 +++++++++++++++++++--
 include/linux/fs.h |    3 +++
 4 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
fs/read_write.c +19 -2
@@ -205,6 +205,20 @@ bad:
 }
 #endif
 
+static int
+__negative_fpos_check(struct file *file, loff_t pos, size_t count)
+{
+	/*
+	 * pos or pos+count is negative here, check overflow.
+	 * too big "count" will be caught in rw_verify_area().
+	 */
+	if ((pos < 0) && (pos + count < pos))
+		return -EOVERFLOW;
+	if (file->f_mode & FMODE_NEG_OFFSET)
+		return 0;
+	return -EINVAL;
+}
+
 /*
  * rw_verify_area doesn't like huge counts. We limit
  * them to something that fits in "int" so that others
@@ -222,8 +236,11 @@ int rw_verify_area(int read_write, struc
 	if (unlikely((ssize_t) count < 0))
 		return retval;
 	pos = *ppos;
-	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0))
-		return retval;
+	if (unlikely((pos < 0) || (loff_t) (pos + count) < 0)) {
+		retval = __negative_fpos_check(file, pos, count);
+		if (retval)
+			return retval;
+	}
 
 	if (unlikely(inode->i_flock && mandatory_lock(inode))) {
 		retval = locks_mandatory_area(
include/linux/fs.h +3 -0
@@ -93,6 +93,9 @@ struct inodes_stat_t {
 /* Expect random access pattern */
 #define FMODE_RANDOM		((__force fmode_t)0x1000)
 
+/* File is huge (eg. /dev/kmem): treat loff_t as unsigned */
+#define FMODE_NEG_OFFSET	((__force fmode_t)0x2000)
+
 /*
  * The below are the various read and write types that we support. Some of
  * them include behavioral modifiers that send information down to the
drivers/char/mem.c +4 -0
@@ -861,6 +861,10 @@ static int memory_open(struct inode *ino
 	if (dev->dev_info)
 		filp->f_mapping->backing_dev_info = dev->dev_info;
 
+	/* Is /dev/mem or /dev/kmem ? */
+	if (dev->dev_info == &directly_mappable_cdev_bdi)
+		filp->f_mode |= FMODE_NEG_OFFSET;
+
 	if (dev->fops->open)
 		return dev->fops->open(inode, filp);
 
fs/proc/base.c +2 -0
@@ -861,6 +861,8 @@ static const struct file_operations proc
 static int mem_open(struct inode* inode, struct file* file)
 {
 	file->private_data = (void*)((long)current->self_exec_id);
+	/* OK to pass negative loff_t, we can catch out-of-range */
+	file->f_mode |= FMODE_NEG_OFFSET;
 	return 0;
 }
 

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to [email protected]. For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"[email protected]"> [email protected] </a>