From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:37696 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755809AbaJXKB2 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 24 Oct 2014 06:01:28 -0400
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2014 12:01:08 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: drivers: random: Shift out-of-bounds in _mix_pool_bytes
Message-ID: <20141024100108.GF12706@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1413802499-17928-1-git-send-email-a.ryabinin@samsung.com>
 <5444EBFA.5030103@samsung.com>
 <20141020124929.GA23177@thunk.org>
 <54451501.2070700@samsung.com>
 <5445179A.4080804@redhat.com>
 <20141020141635.GA4499@thunk.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20141020141635.GA4499@thunk.org>
Sender: linux-kbuild-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kbuild.vger.kernel.org>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu>, Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@redhat.com>, Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@samsung.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, Michal Marek <mmarek@suse.cz>, Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@oracle.com>, x86@kernel.org, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@dilger.ca>, Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>, Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@gmail.com>

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:16:35AM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 04:09:30PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> > >
> > >It's triggering when input_rotate == 0, so UBSan complains about right shift in rol32()
> > >
> > >static inline __u32 rol32(__u32 word, unsigned int shift)
> > >{
> > >	return (word << shift) | (word >> (32 - shift));
> > >}
> > 
> > So that would be the case when the entropy store's input_rotate calls
> > _mix_pool_bytes() for the very first time ... I don't think it's an
> > issue though.
> 
> I'm sure it's not an issue, but it's still true that 
> 
> 	return (word << 0) | (word >> 32);
> 
> is technically not undefined, and while it would be unfortunate (and
> highly unlikely) if gcc were to say, start nethack, it's technically
> allowed by the C spec.  :-)

In fact, n >> 32 == n.

#include <stdio.h>

int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
	int i = atoi(argv[1]);
	int shift = atoi(argv[2]);
	printf("%x\n", i >> shift);
	return 0;
}

$ ./shift 5 32
5

On x86 at least the shift ops simply mask out the upper bits and
therefore the 32 == 0.

So you end up OR-ing the same value twice, which is harmless.

So no misbehaviour on the rol32() function.

I think I've ran into this before, in that case I did get fail because I
did indeed expect the 0 and things didn't work out.