[PATCH] fbdev: Don't spam dmesg on bad userspace ioctl input

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

CC linux-fbdev

On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 4:19 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 03:59:12PM +0200, Daniel Vetter wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 03:53:09PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 4, 2023 at 2:36 PM Daniel Vetter <daniel.vetter at ffwll.ch> wrote:
> > > > There's a few reasons the kernel should not spam dmesg on bad
> > > > userspace ioctl input:
> > > > - at warning level it results in CI false positives
> > > > - it allows userspace to drown dmesg output, potentially hiding real
> > > >   issues.
> > > >
> > > > None of the other generic EINVAL checks report in the
> > > > FBIOPUT_VSCREENINFO ioctl do this, so it's also inconsistent.
> > > >
> > > > I guess the intent of the patch which introduced this warning was that
> > > > the drivers ->fb_check_var routine should fail in that case. Reality
> > > > is that there's too many fbdev drivers and not enough people
> > > > maintaining them by far, and so over the past few years we've simply
> > > > handled all these validation gaps by tighning the checks in the core,
> > > > because that's realistically really all that will ever happen.
> > > >
> > > > Reported-by: syzbot+20dcf81733d43ddff661 at syzkaller.appspotmail.com
> > > > Link: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=c5faf983bfa4a607de530cd3bb008888bf06cefc
> > >
> > >     WARNING: fbcon: Driver 'vkmsdrmfb' missed to adjust virtual screen
> > > size (0x0 vs. 64x768)
> > >
> > > This is a bug in the vkmsdrmfb driver and/or DRM helpers.
> > >
> > > The message was added to make sure the individual drivers are fixed.
> > > Perhaps it should be changed to BUG() instead, so dmesg output
> > > cannot be drown?
> >
> > So you're solution is to essentially force us to replicate this check over
> > all the drivers which cannot change the virtual size?
> >
> > Are you volunteering to field that audit and type all the patches?
>
> Note that at least efifb, vesafb and offb seem to get this wrong. I didn't
> bother checking any of the non-fw drivers. Iow there is a _lot_ of work in
> your nack.

Please don't spread FUD: efifb, vesafb and offb do not implement
fb_ops.fb_check_var(), so they are not affected.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert at linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds