From: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2019 15:40:09 +0000
> On Mon, Jan 28, 2019 at 10:32:30PM +0100, Johannes Berg wrote: > >> At the same time, fixing all this _completely_ is not very realistic, it >> would require passing the ifreq size through to lots of places and >> making the user copy there take the size rather than sizeof(ifreq), >> obviously the very least to the method decnet uses, i.e. sock->ioctl() I >> think, but clearly that affects every other protocol too. >> This was what my previous patch had done partially for the directly >> handled ioctls (the revert of which is the first patch in this series). >> >> > From what I can see this looks like probably the simplest way to >> > fix this in net and -stable currently. >> >> I tend to agree, at least to fix the regression. >> >> We can still deliberate separately if we want to fix decnet for compat >> or if nobody cares now. But perhaps better decnet broken (quite >> obviously and detectably) like it basically always was, than IP broken >> (subtly, if your struct ends up landing at the end of a page). >> >> Al, care to speak up about this here? > > Umm... Short-term I don't see anything better; long-term I would really > like to see compat_alloc_user_space()/copy_in_user() crap gone and > copyin-copyout for anything more or less generic lifted up as far as > cleanly possible, but let's not mix it with regression fixing. It's a real shame, I thought it was a super clever solution to that problem space at the time we added it. > So for the lack of better short-term solutions, > Acked-by: Al Viro <v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk> > on the series. Ok, series applied, thanks everyone. I'll queue this up for -stable too.
