From: Jan Hendrik Farr <kernel@jfarr.cc>
To: Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>
Cc: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@toblux.com>,
kent.overstreet@linux.dev, regressions@lists.linux.dev,
linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ardb@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] erroneous buffer overflow detected in bch2_xattr_validate
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 02:41:44 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZxBdSKuDWh6w_w-z@archlinux> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGG=3QUatjhoDHdkDtZ+ftz7JvMhvaQ9XkFyyZSt_95V_nSN8A@mail.gmail.com>
> I would be in favor of disabling __bdos on a whole struct pointer if
> it will match the functionality between the compilers. I don't think
> Qing has that on her plate at the moment, but when / if she revisits
> that we can discuss exactly how to perform the calculations then.
That's a good approach from my perspective.
To get this done we would:
Now:
1. Disable the __counted_by attribute calculation in clang for whole
struct __bdos cases like in [1] and get this into the next clang point
release (19.1.3)
2. In the kernel, disable __counted_by for clang versions < 19.1.3. Also
backport that into the stable kernels
In the future:
3. Try and figure out what the correct counted_by calculation for whole
structs should be in conjunction with gcc and clang. Either provide an
option in clang and gcc to follow the kernels expectations or change
struct_size in the kernel to match gcc's and clang's future behavior.
[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/112636
Best Regards
Jan
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-17 0:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-26 15:14 [REGRESSION][BISECTED] erroneous buffer overflow detected in bch2_xattr_validate Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-26 15:28 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-09-26 16:09 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-09-26 16:37 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-26 17:01 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-26 17:45 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-26 19:58 ` Ard Biesheuvel
2024-09-26 22:18 ` Bill Wendling
2024-09-27 1:30 ` Bill Wendling
2024-09-27 3:41 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-28 20:50 ` Kees Cook
2024-09-28 23:33 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-29 19:59 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-28 17:36 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-28 17:49 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-09-28 20:34 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-02 9:18 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-10-03 11:33 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 13:07 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-10-03 13:12 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 15:02 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-10-03 15:22 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 15:30 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-10-03 15:35 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 15:43 ` Thorsten Blum
2024-10-03 16:32 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 15:17 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-03 21:28 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-03 21:48 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-04 17:13 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-07 3:56 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-07 15:10 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-16 21:13 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-16 23:41 ` Bill Wendling
2024-10-17 0:09 ` Bill Wendling
2024-10-17 3:04 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-17 16:55 ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-10-17 17:39 ` Miguel Ojeda
2024-10-17 18:55 ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-10-18 11:52 ` Miguel Ojeda
2024-10-21 1:33 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-21 6:04 ` Miguel Ojeda
2024-10-21 17:01 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-21 19:25 ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-10-24 13:16 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-25 1:15 ` Nathan Chancellor
2024-10-25 8:10 ` Miguel Ojeda
2024-10-25 15:27 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2025-05-01 14:30 ` Alan Huang
2025-05-01 16:45 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2025-05-01 17:22 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2025-05-01 17:28 ` Alan Huang
2025-05-01 17:58 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2025-05-01 18:10 ` Kees Cook
2025-05-01 18:18 ` Alan Huang
2024-10-17 0:41 ` Jan Hendrik Farr [this message]
2024-10-14 21:39 ` Bill Wendling
2024-10-16 1:22 ` Bill Wendling
2024-10-16 2:18 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
2024-10-16 20:43 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-03 21:23 ` Kees Cook
2024-10-03 22:05 ` Jan Hendrik Farr
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=ZxBdSKuDWh6w_w-z@archlinux \
--to=kernel@jfarr.cc \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-bcachefs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=regressions@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=thorsten.blum@toblux.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox