From: Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
To: Al Viro <viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Marcus Gelderie <redmnic-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org,
lkml <linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
David Howells <dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>,
John Duffy <jb_duffy-FhtRXb7CoQBt1OO0OYaSVA@public.gmane.org>,
Arto Bendiken <arto-TQ6thHYR8Svk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>,
Linux API <linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>,
akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/1] ipc,mqueue: Delete bogus overflow check
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:59:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55A0867A.1060202@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150711020300.GH17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1872 bytes --]
On 07/10/2015 10:03 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 05:48:11PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> Mathematically, returning -EOVERFLOW in mq_attr_ok()
>> cannot occur under this condition:
>>
>> mq_treesize = attr->mq_maxmsg * sizeof(struct msg_msg) +
>> min_t(unsigned int, attr->mq_maxmsg, MQ_PRIO_MAX) *
>> sizeof(struct posix_msg_tree_node);
>> total_size = attr->mq_maxmsg * attr->mq_msgsize;
>> if (total_size + mq_treesize < total_size)
>> return -EOVERFLOW;
>
> A proof would be nice. More detailed one than "cannot occur", that is.
>
> Condition in question is basically mq_treesize < 0 or
> total_size + mq_treesize (in natural numbers) > 2^BITS_PER_LONG.
> Now, the maximal values of ->mq_maxmsg and ->mq_msgsize are 2^16 and
> 2^24 resp. and we are guaranteed that their product is below 2^BITS_PER_LONG.
> For mq_treesize we are guaranteed that it's below 2^31. Now, on a 64bit
> box that would suffice to avoid overflow - the product is at most 2^40 and
> its sum with mq_treesize can't wrap around.
>
> For 32bit system, though... Suppose attr->mq_maxmsg == 65535 and
> attr->mq_msgsize == 65537. Their product *is* below 2^BITS_PER_LONG - it's
> exactly 1 less than that. _Any_ non-zero value for mq_tresize (and it
> will be non-zero in the above) will lead to wraparound.
>
> Looks like a counterexample to your assertion above...
>
I'm pretty sure you're right. The above looks like an example of "Gee,
we need to protect against signed wrap around. Wait, it's unsigned, no
worries." when in fact unsigned will wrap around too if the total
exceeds the maximum (it just wraps to a small positive value instead of
a large negative value).
--
Doug Ledford <dledford-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 884 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
To: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Marcus Gelderie <redmnic@gmail.com>,
mtk.manpages@gmail.com, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
John Duffy <jb_duffy@btinternet.com>,
Arto Bendiken <arto@bendiken.net>,
Linux API <linux-api@vger.kernel.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/1] ipc,mqueue: Delete bogus overflow check
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 22:59:06 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <55A0867A.1060202@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150711020300.GH17109@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1843 bytes --]
On 07/10/2015 10:03 PM, Al Viro wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 05:48:11PM -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
>> Mathematically, returning -EOVERFLOW in mq_attr_ok()
>> cannot occur under this condition:
>>
>> mq_treesize = attr->mq_maxmsg * sizeof(struct msg_msg) +
>> min_t(unsigned int, attr->mq_maxmsg, MQ_PRIO_MAX) *
>> sizeof(struct posix_msg_tree_node);
>> total_size = attr->mq_maxmsg * attr->mq_msgsize;
>> if (total_size + mq_treesize < total_size)
>> return -EOVERFLOW;
>
> A proof would be nice. More detailed one than "cannot occur", that is.
>
> Condition in question is basically mq_treesize < 0 or
> total_size + mq_treesize (in natural numbers) > 2^BITS_PER_LONG.
> Now, the maximal values of ->mq_maxmsg and ->mq_msgsize are 2^16 and
> 2^24 resp. and we are guaranteed that their product is below 2^BITS_PER_LONG.
> For mq_treesize we are guaranteed that it's below 2^31. Now, on a 64bit
> box that would suffice to avoid overflow - the product is at most 2^40 and
> its sum with mq_treesize can't wrap around.
>
> For 32bit system, though... Suppose attr->mq_maxmsg == 65535 and
> attr->mq_msgsize == 65537. Their product *is* below 2^BITS_PER_LONG - it's
> exactly 1 less than that. _Any_ non-zero value for mq_tresize (and it
> will be non-zero in the above) will lead to wraparound.
>
> Looks like a counterexample to your assertion above...
>
I'm pretty sure you're right. The above looks like an example of "Gee,
we need to protect against signed wrap around. Wait, it's unsigned, no
worries." when in fact unsigned will wrap around too if the total
exceeds the maximum (it just wraps to a small positive value instead of
a large negative value).
--
Doug Ledford <dledford@redhat.com>
GPG KeyID: 0E572FDD
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 884 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-11 2:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-06-22 22:25 [PATCH v2] ipc: Modify message queue accounting to reflect both total user data and auxiliary kernel data Marcus Gelderie
2015-06-22 22:25 ` Marcus Gelderie
[not found] ` <20150622222546.GA32432-W7fNxlbxG8VSq9BJjBFyUp/QNRX+jHPU@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-25 5:47 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-06-25 5:47 ` Davidlohr Bueso
[not found] ` <1435211229.11852.23.camel-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-25 7:23 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-06-25 7:23 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
[not found] ` <CAKgNAkieR5zdpKm=P2dcTDJ_3X4HMRoeOQ2D8yghYVKOjDsYAg-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-06-25 18:21 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-06-25 18:21 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-06 15:49 ` [PATCH v3] ipc: Modify message queue accounting to not take kernel data structures into account Marcus Gelderie
[not found] ` <20150706154928.GA19828-W7fNxlbxG8VSq9BJjBFyUp/QNRX+jHPU@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-07 5:16 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-07 5:16 ` Davidlohr Bueso
[not found] ` <1436246210.12255.71.camel-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-07 13:01 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-07-07 13:01 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
[not found] ` <CAKgNAkjy-+2TkN=0Fe11bVea4q6uLcUx=++Mf1eFxhmPmZoc9w-JsoAwUIsXosN+BqQ9rBEUg@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-08 19:17 ` Doug Ledford
2015-07-08 19:17 ` Doug Ledford
[not found] ` <559D7760.1020909-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-08 19:53 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-07-08 19:53 ` Michael Kerrisk (man-pages)
2015-07-08 21:49 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-08 21:49 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-10 0:00 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-10 0:00 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-11 0:48 ` [PATCH 2/1] ipc,mqueue: Delete bogus overflow check Davidlohr Bueso
2015-07-11 0:48 ` Davidlohr Bueso
[not found] ` <1436575691.27924.53.camel-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-11 2:03 ` Al Viro
2015-07-11 2:03 ` Al Viro
[not found] ` <20150711020300.GH17109-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-11 2:59 ` Doug Ledford [this message]
2015-07-11 2:59 ` Doug Ledford
[not found] ` <55A0867A.1060202-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2015-07-14 16:11 ` Marcus Gelderie
2015-07-14 16:11 ` Marcus Gelderie
2015-06-25 18:50 ` [PATCH v2] ipc: Modify message queue accounting to reflect both total user data and auxiliary kernel data Marcus Gelderie
[not found] ` <20150625185019.GA17933-dYYy/5+rgCadFe0WYshgmA@public.gmane.org_W_724V_09011603_00_009>
2015-07-07 18:49 ` Doug Ledford
2015-07-07 18:49 ` Doug Ledford
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=55A0867A.1060202@redhat.com \
--to=dledford-h+wxahxf7alqt0dzr+alfa@public.gmane.org \
--cc=akpm-de/tnXTf+JLsfHDXvbKv3WD2FQJk+8+b@public.gmane.org \
--cc=arto-TQ6thHYR8Svk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=dave-h16yJtLeMjHk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=dhowells-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jb_duffy-FhtRXb7CoQBt1OO0OYaSVA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-api-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=linux-kernel-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=mtk.manpages-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=redmnic-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=viro-3bDd1+5oDREiFSDQTTA3OLVCufUGDwFn@public.gmane.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.