From: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>
Cc: Amritha Nambiar <amritha.nambiar@intel.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 1/2] cpumask: Introduce possible_cpu_safe()
Date: Mon, 8 Apr 2019 11:09:50 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190408080950.GA15239@kadam> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190404104527.GX4038@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
There have been two cases recently where we pass user a controlled "cpu"
to possible_cpus(). That's not allowed. If it's invalid, it will
trigger a WARN_ONCE() and an out of bounds read which could result in an
Oops.
This patch introduces possible_cpu_safe() which first checks to see if
the cpu is valid, turns off speculation and then checks if the cpu is
possible.
Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@oracle.com>
---
v2: Use nr_cpumask_bits instead of NR_CPUS.
Split cpumask_validate_cpu() into a separate function.
I still left cpumask_test_cpu_safe() return 0 for invalid cpus, instead
of returning -ERANGE I feel it's simpler to stay consistent with the
normal possible_cpu() function.
include/linux/cpumask.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/linux/cpumask.h b/include/linux/cpumask.h
index 147bdec42215..f371e44cb5ff 100644
--- a/include/linux/cpumask.h
+++ b/include/linux/cpumask.h
@@ -11,6 +11,7 @@
#include <linux/threads.h>
#include <linux/bitmap.h>
#include <linux/bug.h>
+#include <linux/nospec.h>
/* Don't assign or return these: may not be this big! */
typedef struct cpumask { DECLARE_BITMAP(bits, NR_CPUS); } cpumask_t;
@@ -102,6 +103,7 @@ extern struct cpumask __cpu_active_mask;
#define num_active_cpus() cpumask_weight(cpu_active_mask)
#define cpu_online(cpu) cpumask_test_cpu((cpu), cpu_online_mask)
#define cpu_possible(cpu) cpumask_test_cpu((cpu), cpu_possible_mask)
+#define cpu_possible_safe(cpu) cpumask_test_cpu_safe((cpu), cpu_possible_mask)
#define cpu_present(cpu) cpumask_test_cpu((cpu), cpu_present_mask)
#define cpu_active(cpu) cpumask_test_cpu((cpu), cpu_active_mask)
#else
@@ -111,6 +113,7 @@ extern struct cpumask __cpu_active_mask;
#define num_active_cpus() 1U
#define cpu_online(cpu) ((cpu) == 0)
#define cpu_possible(cpu) ((cpu) == 0)
+#define cpu_possible_safe(cpu) ((cpu) == 0)
#define cpu_present(cpu) ((cpu) == 0)
#define cpu_active(cpu) ((cpu) == 0)
#endif
@@ -344,6 +347,28 @@ static inline int cpumask_test_cpu(int cpu, const struct cpumask *cpumask)
return test_bit(cpumask_check(cpu), cpumask_bits((cpumask)));
}
+static inline unsigned int cpumask_validate_cpu(unsigned int cpu)
+{
+ if (cpu >= nr_cpumask_bits)
+ return nr_cpumask_bits;
+ return array_index_nospec(cpu, nr_cpumask_bits);
+}
+
+/**
+ * cpumask_test_cpu_safe - test for a cpu in a cpumask
+ * @cpu: cpu number
+ * @cpumask: the cpumask pointer
+ *
+ * Returns 1 if @cpu is valid and set in @cpumask, else returns 0
+ */
+static inline int cpumask_test_cpu_safe(int cpu, const struct cpumask *cpumask)
+{
+ cpu = cpumask_validate_cpu(cpu);
+ if (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids)
+ return 0;
+ return test_bit(cpu, cpumask_bits(cpumask));
+}
+
/**
* cpumask_test_and_set_cpu - atomically test and set a cpu in a cpumask
* @cpu: cpu number (< nr_cpu_ids)
--
2.17.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-08 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-04 10:02 [PATCH 1/2] cpumask: Introduce possible_cpu_safe() Dan Carpenter
2019-04-04 10:04 ` [PATCH 2/2] io_uring: Potential Oops in io_sq_offload_start() Dan Carpenter
2019-04-04 10:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] cpumask: Introduce possible_cpu_safe() Michal Hocko
2019-04-04 11:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-04 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-04-08 8:09 ` Dan Carpenter [this message]
2019-04-08 8:15 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] io_uring: Potential Oops in io_sq_offload_start() Dan Carpenter
2019-04-30 9:26 ` Dan Carpenter
2019-05-03 11:43 ` Dan Carpenter
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=20190408080950.GA15239@kadam \
--to=dan.carpenter@oracle.com \
--cc=amritha.nambiar@intel.com \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=willemb@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).