make 'user_access_begin()' do 'access_ok()'

Originally, the rule used to be that you'd have to do access_ok()
separately, and then user_access_begin() before actually doing the
direct (optimized) user access.

But experience has shown that people then decide not to do access_ok()
at all, and instead rely on it being implied by other operations or
similar.  Which makes it very hard to verify that the access has
actually been range-checked.

If you use the unsafe direct user accesses, hardware features (either
SMAP - Supervisor Mode Access Protection - on x86, or PAN - Privileged
Access Never - on ARM) do force you to use user_access_begin().  But
nothing really forces the range check.

By putting the range check into user_access_begin(), we actually force
people to do the right thing (tm), and the range check vill be visible
near the actual accesses.  We have way too long a history of people
trying to avoid them.

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

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/include/linux/uaccess.h b/include/linux/uaccess.h
index bf2523867a02..37b226e8df13 100644
--- a/include/linux/uaccess.h
+++ b/include/linux/uaccess.h
@@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ extern long strncpy_from_unsafe(char *dst, const void *unsafe_addr, long count);
 	probe_kernel_read(&retval, addr, sizeof(retval))
 
 #ifndef user_access_begin
-#define user_access_begin() do { } while (0)
+#define user_access_begin(ptr,len) access_ok(ptr, len)
 #define user_access_end() do { } while (0)
 #define unsafe_get_user(x, ptr, err) do { if (unlikely(__get_user(x, ptr))) goto err; } while (0)
 #define unsafe_put_user(x, ptr, err) do { if (unlikely(__put_user(x, ptr))) goto err; } while (0)