Just open code it in the only caller.

Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Acked-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

... and the same for its compat counterpart

Signed-off-by: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>

When opening user access to only perform reads, only open read access.
When opening user access to only perform writes, only open write
access.

Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/2e73bc57125c2c6ab12a587586a4eed3a47105fc.1585898438.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr

In commit 9f79b78ef744 ("Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to
unsafe_put_user()") I changed filldir to not do individual __put_user()
accesses, but instead use unsafe_put_user() surrounded by the proper
user_access_begin/end() pair.

That make them enormously faster on modern x86, where the STAC/CLAC
games make individual user accesses fairly heavy-weight.

However, the user_access_begin() range was not really the exact right
one, since filldir() has the unfortunate problem that it needs to not
only fill out the new directory entry, it also needs to fix up the
previous one to contain the proper file offset.

It's unfortunate, but the "d_off" field in "struct dirent" is _not_ the
file offset of the directory entry itself - it's the offset of the next
one.  So we end up backfilling the offset in the previous entry as we
walk along.

But since x86 didn't really care about the exact range, and used to be
the only architecture that did anything fancy in user_access_begin() to
begin with, the filldir[64]() changes did something lazy, and even
commented on it:

	/*
	 * Note! This range-checks 'previous' (which may be NULL).
	 * The real range was checked in getdents
	 */
	if (!user_access_begin(dirent, sizeof(*dirent)))
		goto efault;

and it all worked fine.

But now 32-bit ppc is starting to also implement user_access_begin(),
and the fact that we faked the range to only be the (possibly not even
valid) previous directory entry becomes a problem, because ppc32 will
actually be using the range that is passed in for more than just "check
that it's user space".

This is a complete rewrite of Christophe's original patch.

By saving off the record length of the previous entry instead of a
pointer to it in the filldir data structures, we can simplify the range
check and the writing of the previous entry d_off field.  No need for
any conditionals in the user accesses themselves, although we retain the
conditional EINTR checking for the "was this the first directory entry"
signal handling latency logic.

Fixes: 9f79b78ef744 ("Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to unsafe_put_user()")
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/a02d3426f93f7eb04960a4d9140902d278cab0bb.1579697910.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr/
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/408c90c4068b00ea8f1c41cca45b84ec23d4946b.1579783936.git.christophe.leroy@c-s.fr/
Reported-and-tested-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@c-s.fr>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

Commit 8a23eb804ca4 ("Make filldir[64]() verify the directory entry
filename is valid") added some minimal validity checks on the directory
entries passed to filldir[64]().  But they really were pretty minimal.

This fleshes out at least the name length check: we used to disallow
zero-length names, but really, negative lengths or oevr-long names
aren't ok either.  Both could happen if there is some filesystem
corruption going on.

Now, most filesystems tend to use just an "unsigned char" or similar for
the length of a directory entry name, so even with a corrupt filesystem
you should never see anything odd like that.  But since we then use the
name length to create the directory entry record length, let's make sure
it actually is half-way sensible.

Note how POSIX states that the size of a path component is limited by
NAME_MAX, but we actually use PATH_MAX for the check here.  That's
because while NAME_MAX is generally the correct maximum name length
(it's 255, for the same old "name length is usually just a byte on
disk"), there's nothing in the VFS layer that really cares.

So the real limitation at a VFS layer is the total pathname length you
can pass as a filename: PATH_MAX.

Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

This was always meant to be a temporary thing, just for testing and to
see if it actually ever triggered.

The only thing that reported it was syzbot doing disk image fuzzing, and
then that warning is expected.  So let's just remove it before -rc4,
because the extra sanity testing should probably go to -stable, but we
don't want the warning to do so.

Reported-by: syzbot+3031f712c7ad5dd4d926@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Fixes: 8a23eb804ca4 ("Make filldir[64]() verify the directory entry filename is valid")
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

In commit 9f79b78ef744 ("Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to
unsafe_put_user()") I made filldir() use unsafe_put_user(), which
improves code generation on x86 enormously.

But because we didn't have a "unsafe_copy_to_user()", the dirent name
copy was also done by hand with unsafe_put_user() in a loop, and it
turns out that a lot of other architectures didn't like that, because
unlike x86, they have various alignment issues.

Most non-x86 architectures trap and fix it up, and some (like xtensa)
will just fail unaligned put_user() accesses unconditionally.  Which
makes that "copy using put_user() in a loop" not work for them at all.

I could make that code do explicit alignment etc, but the architectures
that don't like unaligned accesses also don't really use the fancy
"user_access_begin/end()" model, so they might just use the regular old
__copy_to_user() interface.

So this commit takes that looping implementation, turns it into the x86
version of "unsafe_copy_to_user()", and makes other architectures
implement the unsafe copy version as __copy_to_user() (the same way they
do for the other unsafe_xyz() accessor functions).

Note that it only does this for the copying _to_ user space, and we
still don't have a unsafe version of copy_from_user().

That's partly because we have no current users of it, but also partly
because the copy_from_user() case is slightly different and cannot
efficiently be implemented in terms of a unsafe_get_user() loop (because
gcc can't do asm goto with outputs).

It would be trivial to do this using "rep movsb", which would work
really nicely on newer x86 cores, but really badly on some older ones.

Al Viro is looking at cleaning up all our user copy routines to make
this all a non-issue, but for now we have this simple-but-stupid version
for x86 that works fine for the dirent name copy case because those
names are short strings and we simply don't need anything fancier.

Fixes: 9f79b78ef744 ("Convert filldir[64]() from __put_user() to unsafe_put_user()")
Reported-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reported-and-tested-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Max Filippov <jcmvbkbc@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>

This has been discussed several times, and now filesystem people are
talking about doing it individually at the filesystem layer, so head
that off at the pass and just do it in getdents{64}().

This is partially based on a patch by Jann Horn, but checks for NUL
bytes as well, and somewhat simplified.

There's also commentary about how it might be better if invalid names
due to filesystem corruption don't cause an immediate failure, but only
an error at the end of the readdir(), so that people can still see the
filenames that are ok.

There's also been discussion about just how much POSIX strictly speaking
requires this since it's about filesystem corruption.  It's really more
"protect user space from bad behavior" as pointed out by Jann.  But
since Eric Biederman looked up the POSIX wording, here it is for context:

 "From readdir:

   The readdir() function shall return a pointer to a structure
   representing the directory entry at the current position in the
   directory stream specified by the argument dirp, and position the
   directory stream at the next entry. It shall return a null pointer
   upon reaching the end of the directory stream. The structure dirent
   defined in the <dirent.h> header describes a directory entry.

  From definitions:

   3.129 Directory Entry (or Link)

   An object that associates a filename with a file. Several directory
   entries can associate names with the same file.

  ...

   3.169 Filename

   A name consisting of 1 to {NAME_MAX} bytes used to name a file. The
   characters composing the name may be selected from the set of all
   character values excluding the slash character and the null byte. The
   filenames dot and dot-dot have special meaning. A filename is
   sometimes referred to as a 'pathname component'."

Note that I didn't bother adding the checks to any legacy interfaces
that nobody uses.

Also note that if this ends up being noticeable as a performance
regression, we can fix that to do a much more optimized model that
checks for both NUL and '/' at the same time one word at a time.

We haven't really tended to optimize 'memchr()', and it only checks for
one pattern at a time anyway, and we really _should_ check for NUL too
(but see the comment about "soft errors" in the code about why it
currently only checks for '/')

See the CONFIG_DCACHE_WORD_ACCESS case of hash_name() for how the name
lookup code looks for pathname terminating characters in parallel.

Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20190118161440.220134-2-jannh@google.com/
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>
Cc: Eric W. Biederman <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>