From: Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>
To: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@suse.cz>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@google.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@linux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@gmail.com>,
"Gustavo A . R . Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
Bill Wendling <morbo@google.com>,
Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>,
Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>, Marco Elver <elver@google.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org, Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] slab: Introduce kmalloc_obj() and family
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 10:23:46 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202410041014.7DE8981@keescook> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <eae36648-6f9f-486d-b352-c92a315431a1@intel.com>
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 06:27:58AM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote:
> On 8/23/24 01:13, Kees Cook wrote:
>
> > (...) For cases where the total size of the allocation is needed,
> > the kmalloc_obj_sz(), kmalloc_objs_sz(), and kmalloc_flex_sz() family
> > of macros can be used. For example:
> >
> > info->size = struct_size(ptr, flex_member, count);
> > ptr = kmalloc(info->size, gfp);
> >
> > becomes:
> >
> > kmalloc_flex_sz(ptr, flex_member, count, gfp, &info->size);
> >
> > Internal introspection of allocated type now becomes possible, allowing
> > for future alignment-aware choices and hardening work. For example,
> > adding __alignof(*ptr) as an argument to the internal allocators so that
> > appropriate/efficient alignment choices can be made, or being able to
> > correctly choose per-allocation offset randomization within a bucket
> > that does not break alignment requirements.
> >
> > Introduces __flex_count() for when __builtin_get_counted_by() is added
> > by GCC[1] and Clang[2]. The internal use of __flex_count() allows for
> > automatically setting the counter member of a struct's flexible array
> > member when it has been annotated with __counted_by(), avoiding any
> > missed early size initializations while __counted_by() annotations are
> > added to the kernel. Additionally, this also checks for "too large"
> > allocations based on the type size of the counter variable. For example:
> >
> > if (count > type_max(ptr->flex_count))
> > fail...;
> > info->size = struct_size(ptr, flex_member, count);
> > ptr = kmalloc(info->size, gfp);
> > ptr->flex_count = count;
> >
> > becomes (i.e. unchanged from earlier example):
> >
> > kmalloc_flex_sz(ptr, flex_member, count, gfp, &info->size);
>
> As there could be no __builtin_get_counted_by() available, caller still
> needs to fill the counted-by variable, right? So it is possible to just
> pass the in the struct pointer to fill? (last argument "&f->cnt" of the
> snippet below):
>
> struct foo {
> int cnt;
> struct bar[] __counted_by(cnt);
> };
>
> //...
> struct foo *f;
>
> kmalloc_flex_sz(f, cnt, 42, gfp, &f->cnt);
I specifically want to avoid this because it makes adding the
counted_by attribute more difficult -- requiring manual auditing of
all allocation sites, even if we switch all the alloc macros. But if
allocation macros are all replaced with a treewide change, it becomes
trivial to add counted_by annotations without missing "too late" counter
assignments. (And note that the "too late" counter assignments are only
a problem for code built with compilers that support counted_by, so
there's no problem that __builtin_get_counted_by() isn't available.)
Right now we have two cases in kernel code:
case 1:
- allocate
- assign counter
- access array
case 2:
- allocate
- access array
- assign counter
When we add a counted_by annotation, all "case 2" code but be found and
refactored into "case 1". This has proven error-prone already, and we're
still pretty early in adding annotations. The reason refactoring is
needed is because when the compiler supports counted_by instrumentation,
at run-time, we get:
case 1:
- allocate
- assign counter
- access array // no problem!
case 2:
- allocate
- access array // trap!
- assign counter
I want to change this to be:
case 1:
- allocate & assign counter
- assign counter
- access array
case 2:
- allocate & assign counter
- access array
- assign counter
Once the kernel reaches a minimum compiler version where counted_by is
universally available, we can remove all the "open coded" counter
assignments.
-Kees
--
Kees Cook
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-04 17:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-22 23:13 [PATCH v3] slab: Introduce kmalloc_obj() and family Kees Cook
2024-08-23 4:27 ` Przemek Kitszel
2024-10-04 17:23 ` Kees Cook [this message]
2024-08-27 21:32 ` Vlastimil Babka
2024-08-28 0:19 ` Kees Cook
2024-08-28 15:37 ` Christoph Lameter (Ampere)
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=202410041014.7DE8981@keescook \
--to=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=42.hyeyoo@gmail.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=cl@linux.com \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=iamjoonsoo.kim@lge.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=justinstitt@google.com \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=morbo@google.com \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com \
--cc=rientjes@google.com \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=vbabka@suse.cz \
/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).