[PATCH 32/82] vringh: Refactor intentional wrap-around calculation

[PATCH 32/82] vringh: Refactor intentional wrap-around calculation

[Kees Cook]

In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:

	VAR + value < VAR

Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
or pointer[4] types.

Refactor open-coded unsigned wrap-around addition test to use
check_add_overflow(), retaining the result for later usage (which removes
the redundant open-coded addition). This paves the way to enabling the
unsigned wrap-around sanitizer[2] in the future.

Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 drivers/vhost/vringh.c | 8 +++++---
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
index 7b8fd977f71c..07442f0a52bd 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
@@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ static inline bool range_check(struct vringh *vrh, u64 addr, size_t *len,
 			       bool (*getrange)(struct vringh *,
 						u64, struct vringh_range *))
 {
+	u64 sum;
+
 	if (addr < range->start || addr > range->end_incl) {
 		if (!getrange(vrh, addr, range))
 			return false;
@@ -152,20 +154,20 @@ static inline bool range_check(struct vringh *vrh, u64 addr, size_t *len,
 	BUG_ON(addr < range->start || addr > range->end_incl);
 
 	/* To end of memory? */
-	if (unlikely(addr + *len == 0)) {
+	if (unlikely(U64_MAX - addr == *len)) {
 		if (range->end_incl == -1ULL)
 			return true;
 		goto truncate;
 	}
 
 	/* Otherwise, don't wrap. */
-	if (addr + *len < addr) {
+	if (check_add_overflow(addr, *len, &sum)) {
 		vringh_bad("Wrapping descriptor %zu@0x%llx",
 			   *len, (unsigned long long)addr);
 		return false;
 	}
 
-	if (unlikely(addr + *len - 1 > range->end_incl))
+	if (unlikely(sum - 1 > range->end_incl))
 		goto truncate;
 	return true;
 
-- 
2.34.1

[PATCH 77/82] virtio: Refactor intentional wrap-around test

[Kees Cook]

In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:

	VAR + value < VAR

Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
or pointer[4] types.

Refactor open-coded wrap-around addition test to use add_would_overflow().
This paves the way to enabling the wrap-around sanitizers in the future.

Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
 drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
index 0d3dbfaf4b23..710d3bd45b4f 100644
--- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
+++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
@@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ vp_modern_map_capability(struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev, int off,
 
 	length -= start;
 
-	if (start + offset < offset) {
+	if (add_would_overflow(offset, start)) {
 		dev_err(&dev->dev,
 			"virtio_pci: map wrap-around %u+%u\n",
 			start, offset);
@@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ vp_modern_map_capability(struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev, int off,
 	if (len)
 		*len = length;
 
-	if (minlen + offset < minlen ||
+	if (add_would_overflow(minlen, offset) ||
 	    minlen + offset > pci_resource_len(dev, bar)) {
 		dev_err(&dev->dev,
 			"virtio_pci: map virtio %zu@%u "
-- 
2.34.1

Re: [PATCH 32/82] vringh: Refactor intentional wrap-around calculation

[Eugenio Perez Martin]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 2:42 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
> unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
> kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:
>
>         VAR + value < VAR
>
> Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
> types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
> option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
> want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
> instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
> are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
> or pointer[4] types.
>
> Refactor open-coded unsigned wrap-around addition test to use
> check_add_overflow(), retaining the result for later usage (which removes
> the redundant open-coded addition). This paves the way to enabling the
> unsigned wrap-around sanitizer[2] in the future.
>
> Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
> Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
>  drivers/vhost/vringh.c | 8 +++++---
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> index 7b8fd977f71c..07442f0a52bd 100644
> --- a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> +++ b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> @@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ static inline bool range_check(struct vringh *vrh, u64 addr, size_t *len,
>                                bool (*getrange)(struct vringh *,
>                                                 u64, struct vringh_range *))
>  {
> +       u64 sum;

I understand this is part of a bulk change so little time to think
about names :). But what about "end" or similar?

Either way,
Acked-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>

> +
>         if (addr < range->start || addr > range->end_incl) {
>                 if (!getrange(vrh, addr, range))
>                         return false;
> @@ -152,20 +154,20 @@ static inline bool range_check(struct vringh *vrh, u64 addr, size_t *len,
>         BUG_ON(addr < range->start || addr > range->end_incl);
>
>         /* To end of memory? */
> -       if (unlikely(addr + *len == 0)) {
> +       if (unlikely(U64_MAX - addr == *len)) {
>                 if (range->end_incl == -1ULL)
>                         return true;
>                 goto truncate;
>         }
>
>         /* Otherwise, don't wrap. */
> -       if (addr + *len < addr) {
> +       if (check_add_overflow(addr, *len, &sum)) {
>                 vringh_bad("Wrapping descriptor %zu@0x%llx",
>                            *len, (unsigned long long)addr);
>                 return false;
>         }
>
> -       if (unlikely(addr + *len - 1 > range->end_incl))
> +       if (unlikely(sum - 1 > range->end_incl))
>                 goto truncate;
>         return true;
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>

Re: [PATCH 77/82] virtio: Refactor intentional wrap-around test

[Eugenio Perez Martin]

On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 2:28 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
> unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
> kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:
>
>         VAR + value < VAR
>
> Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
> types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
> option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
> want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
> instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
> are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
> or pointer[4] types.
>
> Refactor open-coded wrap-around addition test to use add_would_overflow().
> This paves the way to enabling the wrap-around sanitizers in the future.
>
> Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
> Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> Cc: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
> Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>

Reviewed-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>

> ---
>  drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
> index 0d3dbfaf4b23..710d3bd45b4f 100644
> --- a/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
> +++ b/drivers/virtio/virtio_pci_modern_dev.c
> @@ -59,7 +59,7 @@ vp_modern_map_capability(struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev, int off,
>
>         length -= start;
>
> -       if (start + offset < offset) {
> +       if (add_would_overflow(offset, start)) {
>                 dev_err(&dev->dev,
>                         "virtio_pci: map wrap-around %u+%u\n",
>                         start, offset);
> @@ -81,7 +81,7 @@ vp_modern_map_capability(struct virtio_pci_modern_device *mdev, int off,
>         if (len)
>                 *len = length;
>
> -       if (minlen + offset < minlen ||
> +       if (add_would_overflow(minlen, offset) ||
>             minlen + offset > pci_resource_len(dev, bar)) {
>                 dev_err(&dev->dev,
>                         "virtio_pci: map virtio %zu@%u "
> --
> 2.34.1
>
>

Re: [PATCH 32/82] vringh: Refactor intentional wrap-around calculation

[Kees Cook]

On Fri, Jan 26, 2024 at 08:31:04PM +0100, Eugenio Perez Martin wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 2:42 AM Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> wrote:
> >
> > In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
> > unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
> > kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:
> >
> >         VAR + value < VAR
> >
> > Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
> > types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
> > option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
> > want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
> > instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
> > are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
> > or pointer[4] types.
> >
> > Refactor open-coded unsigned wrap-around addition test to use
> > check_add_overflow(), retaining the result for later usage (which removes
> > the redundant open-coded addition). This paves the way to enabling the
> > unsigned wrap-around sanitizer[2] in the future.
> >
> > Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
> > Cc: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
> > Cc: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> > Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org
> > Cc: virtualization@lists.linux.dev
> > Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---
> >  drivers/vhost/vringh.c | 8 +++++---
> >  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > index 7b8fd977f71c..07442f0a52bd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > @@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ static inline bool range_check(struct vringh *vrh, u64 addr, size_t *len,
> >                                bool (*getrange)(struct vringh *,
> >                                                 u64, struct vringh_range *))
> >  {
> > +       u64 sum;
> 
> I understand this is part of a bulk change so little time to think
> about names :). But what about "end" or similar?
> 
> Either way,
> Acked-by: Eugenio Pérez <eperezma@redhat.com>

Thanks! Yeah, you are not alone in suggesting "end" in a several of
these patches. :)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook