From: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>, Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>,
linux-input@vger.kernel.org,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fortify: cosmetic cleanups to __compiletime_strlen
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2022 12:06:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202208311138.2CA3E54B0D@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220830205309.312864-3-ndesaulniers@google.com>
On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 01:53:08PM -0700, Nick Desaulniers wrote:
> Two things I noticed in __compiletime_strlen:
Four? :)
> 1. A temporary, __p, is created+used to avoid repeated side effects from
> multiple evaluation of the macro parameter, but the macro parameter
> was being used accidentally in __builtin_object_size.
__builtin_object_size(), like sizeof() but unlike __builtin_strlen(),
will not evaluate side-effects: https://godbolt.org/z/Yaa1z7YvK
And using bos on __p will sometimes mask the actual object, so p needs to
stay the argument.
> 2. The temporary has a curious signedness and const-less qualification.
> Just use __auto_type.
__auto_type is pretty rare in the kernel, but does provide the removal
of "const". Even though the kernel builds with -Wno-pointer-sign, the
explicit case does fix a potential warnings about signedness differences,
not just const differences, for __builtin_strlen() which requires "const
char *", but many arguments are "unsigned char *", "u8 *", etc.
Is __auto_type more readable than the explicit cast? It does seem to
work fine.
> 3. (size_t)-1 is perhaps more readable as -1UL.
That's true, though I kind of prefer (size_t)-1, though yes, it appears
to be the extreme minority in the kernel.
> 4. __p_size == -1UL when __builtin_object_size can't evaluate the
> object size at compile time. We could just reuse __ret and use one
> less variable here.
This seems to get entire optimized away by the compiler? I think it's
more readable to keep the explicit variable.
-Kees
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
> ---
> include/linux/fortify-string.h | 9 ++++-----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fortify-string.h b/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> index c5adad596a3f..aaf73575050f 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> @@ -22,11 +22,10 @@ void __write_overflow_field(size_t avail, size_t wanted) __compiletime_warning("
>
> #define __compiletime_strlen(p) \
> ({ \
> - unsigned char *__p = (unsigned char *)(p); \
> - size_t __ret = (size_t)-1; \
> - size_t __p_size = __object_size(p, 1); \
> - if (__p_size != (size_t)-1) { \
> - size_t __p_len = __p_size - 1; \
> + __auto_type __p = (p); \
> + size_t __ret = __object_size(__p, 1); \
> + if (__ret != -1UL) { \
> + size_t __p_len = __ret - 1; \
> if (__builtin_constant_p(__p[__p_len]) && \
> __p[__p_len] == '\0') \
> __ret = __builtin_strlen(__p); \
> --
> 2.37.2.672.g94769d06f0-goog
>
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-08-31 19:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-30 20:53 [PATCH 0/3] Fix FORTIFY=y UBSAN_LOCAL_BOUNDS=y Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-30 20:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] fortify: use __builtin_dynamic_object_size in __compiletime_strlen Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-31 18:34 ` Kees Cook
2022-08-30 20:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] fortify: cosmetic cleanups to __compiletime_strlen Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-31 13:13 ` kernel test robot
2022-08-31 19:06 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2022-08-30 20:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] HID: avoid runtime call to strlen Nick Desaulniers
2022-08-31 6:05 ` Greg KH
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=202208311138.2CA3E54B0D@keescook \
--to=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com \
--cc=jikos@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-input@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=trix@redhat.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).