Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Disable io_uring #84

Open
prettySongbird opened this issue Jun 16, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Disable io_uring #84

prettySongbird opened this issue Jun 16, 2023 · 4 comments
Assignees
@anthraxx
Labels
accepted Patch accepted and pending to be applied enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@prettySongbird
Copy link

The io_uring system call continues to be the source of many security issues.
As a consequence, google disables this feature on their systems, including ChromeOS and Android.
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Google-Restricting-IO_uring

It would probably be a good idea to do the same for linux-hardening
@prettySongbird
Copy link
Author

Starting with Linux 6.6 the io_uring feature can be easily disabled:
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.6-sysctl-IO_uring

@anthraxx
Copy link
Owner

This sounds like a reasonable request and quite straight forward way to do it. I'll make sure this lands in all trees asap.

@anthraxx anthraxx self-assigned this Jul 15, 2023
@anthraxx anthraxx added enhancement New feature or request accepted Patch accepted and pending to be applied labels Jul 15, 2023
@sempervictus
Copy link

Grsecurity hardcodes this - i have branch specifically enabling it for a required use-case. If they consider it too dangerous given the myriad of defenses built into their patches, its probably not a great thing to have sitting around.

@thestinger
Copy link

@prettySongbird Android doesn't disable io_uring but rather only allows the core system fastbootd and snapuserd processes to use io_uring via the static full system SELinux policy. Similarly, it has rules for using userfaultfd and generic ioctl filtering where specific ioctl commands are whitelisted for specific devices.

@adrelanos adrelanos mentioned this issue Jan 9, 2024
Merged
anthraxx pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 3, 2024
@puleglot @gregkh
ALSA: usb-audio: Check presence of valid altsetting control
e59905c 
[ Upstream commit 346f59d ]

Many devices with a single alternate setting do not have a Valid
Alternate Setting Control and validation performed by
validate_sample_rate_table_v2v3() doesn't work on them and is not
really needed. So check the presense of control before sending
altsetting validation requests.

MOTU Microbook IIc is suffering the most without this check. It
takes up to 40 seconds to bootup due to how slow it switches
sampling rates:

[ 2659.164824] usb 3-2: New USB device found, idVendor=07fd, idProduct=0004, bcdDevice= 0.60
[ 2659.164827] usb 3-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
[ 2659.164829] usb 3-2: Product: MicroBook IIc
[ 2659.164830] usb 3-2: Manufacturer: MOTU
[ 2659.166204] usb 3-2: Found last interface = 3
[ 2679.322298] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 1:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2679.322306] usb 3-2: 1:1: add audio endpoint 0x3
[ 2679.322321] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #3
[ 2679.322552] usb 3-2: 1:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1
[ 2684.362250] usb 3-2: 2:1: cannot get freq (v2/v3): err -110
[ 2694.444700] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 2:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2694.444707] usb 3-2: 2:1: add audio endpoint 0x84
[ 2694.444721] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #84
[ 2699.482103] usb 3-2: 2:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1

Signed-off-by: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240129121254.3454481-1-alexander@tsoy.me
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
anthraxx pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 3, 2024
@puleglot @gregkh
ALSA: usb-audio: Check presence of valid altsetting control
c7bdaff 
[ Upstream commit 346f59d ]

Many devices with a single alternate setting do not have a Valid
Alternate Setting Control and validation performed by
validate_sample_rate_table_v2v3() doesn't work on them and is not
really needed. So check the presense of control before sending
altsetting validation requests.

MOTU Microbook IIc is suffering the most without this check. It
takes up to 40 seconds to bootup due to how slow it switches
sampling rates:

[ 2659.164824] usb 3-2: New USB device found, idVendor=07fd, idProduct=0004, bcdDevice= 0.60
[ 2659.164827] usb 3-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
[ 2659.164829] usb 3-2: Product: MicroBook IIc
[ 2659.164830] usb 3-2: Manufacturer: MOTU
[ 2659.166204] usb 3-2: Found last interface = 3
[ 2679.322298] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 1:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2679.322306] usb 3-2: 1:1: add audio endpoint 0x3
[ 2679.322321] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #3
[ 2679.322552] usb 3-2: 1:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1
[ 2684.362250] usb 3-2: 2:1: cannot get freq (v2/v3): err -110
[ 2694.444700] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 2:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2694.444707] usb 3-2: 2:1: add audio endpoint 0x84
[ 2694.444721] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #84
[ 2699.482103] usb 3-2: 2:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1

Signed-off-by: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240129121254.3454481-1-alexander@tsoy.me
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
anthraxx pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 3, 2024
@puleglot @gregkh
ALSA: usb-audio: Check presence of valid altsetting control
ee27770 
[ Upstream commit 346f59d ]

Many devices with a single alternate setting do not have a Valid
Alternate Setting Control and validation performed by
validate_sample_rate_table_v2v3() doesn't work on them and is not
really needed. So check the presense of control before sending
altsetting validation requests.

MOTU Microbook IIc is suffering the most without this check. It
takes up to 40 seconds to bootup due to how slow it switches
sampling rates:

[ 2659.164824] usb 3-2: New USB device found, idVendor=07fd, idProduct=0004, bcdDevice= 0.60
[ 2659.164827] usb 3-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
[ 2659.164829] usb 3-2: Product: MicroBook IIc
[ 2659.164830] usb 3-2: Manufacturer: MOTU
[ 2659.166204] usb 3-2: Found last interface = 3
[ 2679.322298] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 1:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2679.322306] usb 3-2: 1:1: add audio endpoint 0x3
[ 2679.322321] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #3
[ 2679.322552] usb 3-2: 1:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1
[ 2684.362250] usb 3-2: 2:1: cannot get freq (v2/v3): err -110
[ 2694.444700] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 2:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2694.444707] usb 3-2: 2:1: add audio endpoint 0x84
[ 2694.444721] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #84
[ 2699.482103] usb 3-2: 2:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1

Signed-off-by: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240129121254.3454481-1-alexander@tsoy.me
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
anthraxx pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 3, 2024
@puleglot @gregkh
ALSA: usb-audio: Check presence of valid altsetting control
cdc31d1 
[ Upstream commit 346f59d ]

Many devices with a single alternate setting do not have a Valid
Alternate Setting Control and validation performed by
validate_sample_rate_table_v2v3() doesn't work on them and is not
really needed. So check the presense of control before sending
altsetting validation requests.

MOTU Microbook IIc is suffering the most without this check. It
takes up to 40 seconds to bootup due to how slow it switches
sampling rates:

[ 2659.164824] usb 3-2: New USB device found, idVendor=07fd, idProduct=0004, bcdDevice= 0.60
[ 2659.164827] usb 3-2: New USB device strings: Mfr=1, Product=2, SerialNumber=0
[ 2659.164829] usb 3-2: Product: MicroBook IIc
[ 2659.164830] usb 3-2: Manufacturer: MOTU
[ 2659.166204] usb 3-2: Found last interface = 3
[ 2679.322298] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 1:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2679.322306] usb 3-2: 1:1: add audio endpoint 0x3
[ 2679.322321] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #3
[ 2679.322552] usb 3-2: 1:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1
[ 2684.362250] usb 3-2: 2:1: cannot get freq (v2/v3): err -110
[ 2694.444700] usb 3-2: No valid sample rate available for 2:1, assuming a firmware bug
[ 2694.444707] usb 3-2: 2:1: add audio endpoint 0x84
[ 2694.444721] usb 3-2: Creating new data endpoint #84
[ 2699.482103] usb 3-2: 2:1 Set sample rate 96000, clock 1

Signed-off-by: Alexander Tsoy <alexander@tsoy.me>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240129121254.3454481-1-alexander@tsoy.me
Signed-off-by: Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
anthraxx pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 14, 2024
@chleroy @gregkh
powerpc/bpf/32: Fix failing test_bpf tests
0d5c132 
[ Upstream commit 8ecf3c1 ]

Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module
exhibits the following failures:

  test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)
  test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

  test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 301 PASS
  test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 555 PASS
  test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 268 PASS
  test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 269 PASS
  test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 460 PASS
  test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 320 PASS
  test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 222 PASS
  test_bpf: #320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476
  eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
  jited:0 273 PASS

  test_bpf: #344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B
  eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 432 PASS
  test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H
  eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 381 PASS
  test_bpf: #346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
  eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported
  jited:0 505 PASS

  test_bpf: #490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1
  eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported
  jited:0 261 PASS

  test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed]

Fix them by adding missing processing.

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Link: https://msgid.link/91de862dda99d170697eb79ffb478678af7e0b27.1709652689.git.christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@anthraxx anthraxx

Labels
accepted Patch accepted and pending to be applied enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@anthraxx @sempervictus @thestinger @prettySongbird