From nobody Sun Dec 05 13:22:07 2021 X-Original-To: dev-commits-src-all@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D643B1892192; Sun, 5 Dec 2021 13:22:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from kib.kiev.ua (kib.kiev.ua [IPv6:2001:470:d5e7:1::1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4J6S064Tpnz3JQt; Sun, 5 Dec 2021 13:22:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) Received: from tom.home (kib@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by kib.kiev.ua (8.16.1/8.16.1) with ESMTPS id 1B5DM7XG036895 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 5 Dec 2021 15:22:10 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.10.3 kib.kiev.ua 1B5DM7XG036895 Received: (from kostik@localhost) by tom.home (8.16.1/8.16.1/Submit) id 1B5DM7wO036894; Sun, 5 Dec 2021 15:22:07 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from kostikbel@gmail.com) X-Authentication-Warning: tom.home: kostik set sender to kostikbel@gmail.com using -f Date: Sun, 5 Dec 2021 15:22:07 +0200 From: Konstantin Belousov To: Jessica Clarke Cc: "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org" , "dev-commits-src-main@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: git: a4e4132fa3bf - main - swapoff(2): replace special device name argument with a structure Message-ID: References: <202112042221.1B4ML7Ov002151@gitrepo.freebsd.org> List-Id: Commit messages for all branches of the src repository List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/dev-commits-src-all List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: dev-commits-src-all@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD,FREEMAIL_FROM, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5 (2021-03-20) on tom.home X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4J6S064Tpnz3JQt X-Spamd-Bar: ---- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[] X-ThisMailContainsUnwantedMimeParts: N On Sun, Dec 05, 2021 at 03:03:26AM +0000, Jessica Clarke wrote: > On 4 Dec 2021, at 22:21, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > > The branch main has been updated by kib: > > > > URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=a4e4132fa3bfadb6047fc0fa5f399f4640460300 > > > > commit a4e4132fa3bfadb6047fc0fa5f399f4640460300 > > Author: Konstantin Belousov > > AuthorDate: 2021-11-29 16:26:31 +0000 > > Commit: Konstantin Belousov > > CommitDate: 2021-12-04 22:20:58 +0000 > > > > swapoff(2): replace special device name argument with a structure > > > > For compatibility, add a placeholder pointer to the start of the > > added struct swapoff_new_args, and use it to distinguish old vs. new > > style of syscall invocation. > > > > Reviewed by: markj > > Discussed with: alc > > Sponsored by: The FreeBSD Foundation > > MFC after: 1 week > > Differential revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D33165 > > --- > > sys/vm/swap_pager.c | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > > sys/vm/swap_pager.h | 8 ++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/sys/vm/swap_pager.c b/sys/vm/swap_pager.c > > index 165373d1b527..dc1df79f4fcd 100644 > > --- a/sys/vm/swap_pager.c > > +++ b/sys/vm/swap_pager.c > > @@ -2491,15 +2491,38 @@ sys_swapoff(struct thread *td, struct swapoff_args *uap) > > struct vnode *vp; > > struct nameidata nd; > > struct swdevt *sp; > > - int error; > > + struct swapoff_new_args sa; > > + int error, probe_byte; > > > > error = priv_check(td, PRIV_SWAPOFF); > > if (error) > > return (error); > > > > + /* > > + * Detect old vs. new-style swapoff(2) syscall. The first > > + * pointer in the memory pointed to by uap->name is NULL for > > + * the new variant. > > + */ > > + probe_byte = fubyte(uap->name); > > + switch (probe_byte) { > > + case -1: > > + return (EFAULT); > > + case 0: > > + error = copyin(uap->name, &sa, sizeof(sa)); > > + if (error != 0) > > + return (error); > > + if (sa.flags != 0) > > + return (EINVAL); > > + break; > > + default: > > + bzero(&sa, sizeof(sa)); > > + sa.name = uap->name; > > + break; > > + } > > Doesn’t this change the semantics of swapoff("")? > > Previously it would fail deterministically, presumably with ENOENT or > something, but now it reinterprets whatever follows that string in > memory as the new argument structure. It probably doesn’t matter, but > this approach is ugly. Can we not just define a new syscall rather than > this kind of bodge? Having two swapoff() syscalls is worse, and having them only differ in semantic by single flag is kind of crime. I do not see swapoff("") as problematic, we are changing a minor semantic of the management syscall. I only wanted to avoid flag day for swapoff binaries. BTW, I considered requiring proper alignment for uap->name, and then checking the whole uap->name_old_syscall for NULL, but then decided that this is overkill. If you think that swapoff("") that important, I can add that additional verification.