Re: [Qemu-arm] [Qemu-devel] getdents patch for 64-bit app on 32-bit host

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 12:00:00PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote:
> On 17 April 2018 at 22:53, Henry Wertz <hwertz10@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Peter Maydell has raised a concern about possible buffer overflows in this
> > code (which was meant to handle 32-bit app on 64-bit system, not 64-bit on
> > 32-bit).  I must admit I haven't gone through the dirent-copying code with a
> > fine-toothed comb... it appeared to work for my use case.  That said, the
> > code seems to be careful about using offsetof() rather than making any
> > assumptions.  In addition, the dirent-copying code appears to have an assert
> > that would crash qemu if it was going to write past the end of the dirent
> > buffer -- always nice to have plenty of sanity checks!
> 
> If you build the attached test program for x86-64 (which is a
> minor tweak on the test program in the Linux getdents manpage):
>  gcc -g -Wall -o /tmp/getdents getdents.c -static
> 
> and then on a 32-bit Arm host take a qemu-x86_64 with your patch
> applied, and a test directory like this:
> 
> $ ls /tmp/testdir/
> abcd  abcde
> 
> and run it, QEMU will abort on the assert that we don't run off
> the end of the buffer:
> 
> $ ./build/all-a32/x86_64-linux-user/qemu-x86_64 ~/getdents /tmp/testdir
> linux_dirent struct size 24 bytes
> buffer space 32 bytes
> qemu-x86_64: /home/peter.maydell/qemu/linux-user/syscall.c:10197:
> do_syscall: Assertion `count1 + treclen <= count' failed.
> 
> This is because the guest linux_dirent is bigger than the host
> linux_dirent, and therefore just because the host syscall
> successfully fit the record into the buffer doesn't mean we
> can fit the guest record into the buffer.
> 
> I don't see any way to fix this, because the records are variable size.

If we can't even get something common like dirents working with 64-bit
guest on 32-bit host, should we refuse to even build 64-bit linux-user
emulation on a 32-bit host ?  There must be many other similar cases
where the 64-bit guest syscall is going have insufficient space in the
host 32-bit syscall structs.

Regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com      -o-    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org         -o-            https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org    -o-    https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|