linux-hardening - [PATCH v2] module: Clarify documentation of module_param

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 13 Sep 2023 16:54:14 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>,
        Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...ogle.com>,
        Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>, Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        linux-modules@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2] module: Clarify documentation of module_param_call()

Commit 9bbb9e5a3310 ("param: use ops in struct kernel_param, rather than
get and set fns directly") added the comment that module_param_call()
was deprecated, during a large scale refactoring to bring sanity to type
casting back then. In 2017 following more cleanups, it became useful
again as it wraps a common pattern of creating an ops struct for a
given get/set pair:

  b2f270e87473 ("module: Prepare to convert all module_param_call() prototypes")
  ece1996a21ee ("module: Do not paper over type mismatches in module_param_call()")

        static const struct kernel_param_ops __param_ops_##name = \
                { .flags = 0, .set = _set, .get = _get }; \
        __module_param_call(MODULE_PARAM_PREFIX, \
                            name, &__param_ops_##name, arg, perm, -1, 0)

        __module_param_call(MODULE_PARAM_PREFIX, name, ops, arg, perm, -1, 0)

Many users of module_param_cb() appear to be almost universally
open-coding the same thing that module_param_call() does now. Don't
discourage[1] people from using module_param_call(): clarify the comment
to show that module_param_cb() is useful if you repeatedly use the same
pair of get/set functions.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/202308301546.5C789E5EC@keescook/

Cc: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
Cc: Jessica Yu <jeyu@...nel.org>
Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...ogle.com>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
Cc: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Cc: linux-modules@...r.kernel.org
Reviewed-by: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@...nel.org>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
Luis, I note that include/linux/moduleparam.h isn't in the MAINTAINERS
file pattern. Perhaps you want to use include/linux/module*.h?
---
 include/linux/moduleparam.h | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/moduleparam.h b/include/linux/moduleparam.h
index 962cd41a2cb5..d4452f93d060 100644
--- a/include/linux/moduleparam.h
+++ b/include/linux/moduleparam.h
@@ -293,7 +293,11 @@ struct kparam_array
 	= { __param_str_##name, THIS_MODULE, ops,			\
 	    VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(perm), level, flags, { arg } }
 
-/* Obsolete - use module_param_cb() */
+/*
+ * Useful for describing a set/get pair used only once (i.e. for this
+ * parameter). For repeated set/get pairs (i.e. the same struct
+ * kernel_param_ops), use module_param_cb() instead.
+ */
 #define module_param_call(name, _set, _get, arg, perm)			\
 	static const struct kernel_param_ops __param_ops_##name =	\
 		{ .flags = 0, .set = _set, .get = _get };		\
-- 
2.34.1