All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>
To: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
Cc: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
	linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH v2][next] RDMA/core: Fix multiple -Warray-bounds warnings
Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 17:47:03 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZBpB91qQcB10m3Fw@work> (raw)

GCC-13 (and Clang)[1] does not like to access a partially allocated
object, since it cannot reason about it for bounds checking.

In this case 140 bytes are allocated for an object of type struct
ib_umad_packet:

        packet = kzalloc(sizeof(*packet) + IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR, GFP_KERNEL);

However, notice that sizeof(*packet) is only 104 bytes:

struct ib_umad_packet {
        struct ib_mad_send_buf *   msg;                  /*     0     8 */
        struct ib_mad_recv_wc *    recv_wc;              /*     8     8 */
        struct list_head           list;                 /*    16    16 */
        int                        length;               /*    32     4 */

        /* XXX 4 bytes hole, try to pack */

        struct ib_user_mad         mad __attribute__((__aligned__(8))); /*    40    64 */

        /* size: 104, cachelines: 2, members: 5 */
        /* sum members: 100, holes: 1, sum holes: 4 */
        /* forced alignments: 1, forced holes: 1, sum forced holes: 4 */
        /* last cacheline: 40 bytes */
} __attribute__((__aligned__(8)));

and 36 bytes extra bytes are allocated for a flexible-array member in
struct ib_user_mad:

include/rdma/ib_mad.h:
120 enum {
...
123         IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR = 36,
... }

struct ib_user_mad {
        struct ib_user_mad_hdr     hdr;                  /*     0    64 */
        /* --- cacheline 1 boundary (64 bytes) --- */
        __u64                      data[] __attribute__((__aligned__(8))); /*    64     0 */

        /* size: 64, cachelines: 1, members: 2 */
        /* forced alignments: 1 */
} __attribute__((__aligned__(8)));

So we have sizeof(*packet) + IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR == 140 bytes

Then the address of the flex-array member (for which only 36 bytes were
allocated) is casted and copied into a pointer to struct ib_rmpp_mad,
which, in turn, is of size 256 bytes:

        rmpp_mad = (struct ib_rmpp_mad *) packet->mad.data;

struct ib_rmpp_mad {
        struct ib_mad_hdr          mad_hdr;              /*     0    24 */
        struct ib_rmpp_hdr         rmpp_hdr;             /*    24    12 */
        u8                         data[220];            /*    36   220 */

        /* size: 256, cachelines: 4, members: 3 */
};

The thing is that those 36 bytes allocated for flex-array member data
in struct ib_user_mad onlly account for the size of both struct ib_mad_hdr
and struct ib_rmpp_hdr, but nothing is left for array u8 data[220].
So, the compiler is legitimately complaining about accessing an object
for which not enough memory was allocated.

Apparently, the only members of struct ib_rmpp_mad that are relevant
(that are actually being used) in function ib_umad_write() are mad_hdr
and rmpp_hdr. So, instead of casting packet->mad.data to
(struct ib_rmpp_mad *) create a new structure

struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr {
        struct ib_mad_hdr       mad_hdr;
        struct ib_rmpp_hdr      rmpp_hdr;
} __packed;

and cast packet->mad.data to (struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr *).

Notice that

        IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR == sizeof(struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr) == 36 bytes

Refactor the rest of the code, accordingly.

Fix the following warnings seen under GCC-13 and -Warray-bounds:
drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c:564:50: warning: array subscript ‘struct ib_rmpp_mad[0]’ is partly outside array bounds of ‘unsigned char[140]’ [-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c:566:42: warning: array subscript ‘struct ib_rmpp_mad[0]’ is partly outside array bounds of ‘unsigned char[140]’ [-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c:618:25: warning: array subscript ‘struct ib_rmpp_mad[0]’ is partly outside array bounds of ‘unsigned char[140]’ [-Warray-bounds=]
drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c:622:44: warning: array subscript ‘struct ib_rmpp_mad[0]’ is partly outside array bounds of ‘unsigned char[140]’ [-Warray-bounds=]

Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/273
Link: https://godbolt.org/z/oYWaGM4Yb [1]
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
---
Hi!

Another way to fix this is to create a new structure. I think I like
this better; it avoids this horrid hack:

rmpp_hdr = *(struct ib_rmpp_hdr *)((u8 *)packet->mad.data + sizeof(struct ib_mad_hdr));

but it's up to you to pick the one you prefer. :)

Changes in v2:
 - Create new struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr.

v1:
 Link: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-hardening/ZBo5x5e7B25hHr4F@work/

 drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c | 23 ++++++++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c
index f83954180a33..d21c0a042f0a 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/user_mad.c
@@ -131,6 +131,11 @@ struct ib_umad_packet {
 	struct ib_user_mad mad;
 };
 
+struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr {
+	struct ib_mad_hdr	mad_hdr;
+	struct ib_rmpp_hdr      rmpp_hdr;
+} __packed;
+
 #define CREATE_TRACE_POINTS
 #include <trace/events/ib_umad.h>
 
@@ -494,11 +499,11 @@ static ssize_t ib_umad_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
 			     size_t count, loff_t *pos)
 {
 	struct ib_umad_file *file = filp->private_data;
+	struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr *rmpp_mad_hdr;
 	struct ib_umad_packet *packet;
 	struct ib_mad_agent *agent;
 	struct rdma_ah_attr ah_attr;
 	struct ib_ah *ah;
-	struct ib_rmpp_mad *rmpp_mad;
 	__be64 *tid;
 	int ret, data_len, hdr_len, copy_offset, rmpp_active;
 	u8 base_version;
@@ -506,7 +511,7 @@ static ssize_t ib_umad_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
 	if (count < hdr_size(file) + IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR)
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	packet = kzalloc(sizeof *packet + IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR, GFP_KERNEL);
+	packet = kzalloc(sizeof(*packet) + IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR, GFP_KERNEL);
 	if (!packet)
 		return -ENOMEM;
 
@@ -560,13 +565,13 @@ static ssize_t ib_umad_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
 		goto err_up;
 	}
 
-	rmpp_mad = (struct ib_rmpp_mad *) packet->mad.data;
-	hdr_len = ib_get_mad_data_offset(rmpp_mad->mad_hdr.mgmt_class);
+	rmpp_mad_hdr = (struct ib_rmpp_mad_hdr *)packet->mad.data;
+	hdr_len = ib_get_mad_data_offset(rmpp_mad_hdr->mad_hdr.mgmt_class);
 
-	if (ib_is_mad_class_rmpp(rmpp_mad->mad_hdr.mgmt_class)
+	if (ib_is_mad_class_rmpp(rmpp_mad_hdr->mad_hdr.mgmt_class)
 	    && ib_mad_kernel_rmpp_agent(agent)) {
 		copy_offset = IB_MGMT_RMPP_HDR;
-		rmpp_active = ib_get_rmpp_flags(&rmpp_mad->rmpp_hdr) &
+		rmpp_active = ib_get_rmpp_flags(&rmpp_mad_hdr->rmpp_hdr) &
 						IB_MGMT_RMPP_FLAG_ACTIVE;
 	} else {
 		copy_offset = IB_MGMT_MAD_HDR;
@@ -615,12 +620,12 @@ static ssize_t ib_umad_write(struct file *filp, const char __user *buf,
 		tid = &((struct ib_mad_hdr *) packet->msg->mad)->tid;
 		*tid = cpu_to_be64(((u64) agent->hi_tid) << 32 |
 				   (be64_to_cpup(tid) & 0xffffffff));
-		rmpp_mad->mad_hdr.tid = *tid;
+		rmpp_mad_hdr->mad_hdr.tid = *tid;
 	}
 
 	if (!ib_mad_kernel_rmpp_agent(agent)
-	   && ib_is_mad_class_rmpp(rmpp_mad->mad_hdr.mgmt_class)
-	   && (ib_get_rmpp_flags(&rmpp_mad->rmpp_hdr) & IB_MGMT_RMPP_FLAG_ACTIVE)) {
+	    && ib_is_mad_class_rmpp(rmpp_mad_hdr->mad_hdr.mgmt_class)
+	    && (ib_get_rmpp_flags(&rmpp_mad_hdr->rmpp_hdr) & IB_MGMT_RMPP_FLAG_ACTIVE)) {
 		spin_lock_irq(&file->send_lock);
 		list_add_tail(&packet->list, &file->send_list);
 		spin_unlock_irq(&file->send_lock);
-- 
2.34.1


             reply	other threads:[~2023-03-21 23:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-03-21 23:47 Gustavo A. R. Silva [this message]
2023-03-23 10:20 ` [PATCH v2][next] RDMA/core: Fix multiple -Warray-bounds warnings Leon Romanovsky

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=ZBpB91qQcB10m3Fw@work \
    --to=gustavoars@kernel.org \
    --cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
    --cc=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-rdma@vger.kernel.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.