Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@csgroup.eu> writes:
> Le 20/08/2021 à 09:49, Michael Ellerman a écrit :
>> Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org> writes:
>>> In preparation for FORTIFY_SOURCE performing compile-time and run-time
>>> field bounds checking for memset(), avoid intentionally writing across
>>> neighboring fields.
>>>
>>> Add a struct_group() for the spe registers so that memset() can correctly 
>>> reason
>>> about the size:
>>>
>>>     In function 'fortify_memset_chk',
>>>         inlined from 'restore_user_regs.part.0' at 
>>> arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c:539:3:
>>>>> include/linux/fortify-string.h:195:4: error: call to 
>>>>> '__write_overflow_field' declared with attribute warning: detected write 
>>>>> beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? 
>>>>> [-Werror=attribute-warning]
>>>       195 |    __write_overflow_field();
>>>           |    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>
>>> Cc: Michael Ellerman <m...@ellerman.id.au>
>>> Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <b...@kernel.crashing.org>
>>> Cc: Paul Mackerras <pau...@samba.org>
>>> Cc: Christophe Leroy <christophe.le...@csgroup.eu>
>>> Cc: Sudeep Holla <sudeep.ho...@arm.com>
>>> Cc: linuxppc-...@lists.ozlabs.org
>>> Reported-by: kernel test robot <l...@intel.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keesc...@chromium.org>
>>> ---
>>>   arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h | 6 ++++--
>>>   arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c      | 6 +++---
>>>   2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h 
>>> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> index f348e564f7dd..05dc567cb9a8 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h
>>> @@ -191,8 +191,10 @@ struct thread_struct {
>>>     int             used_vsr;       /* set if process has used VSX */
>>>   #endif /* CONFIG_VSX */
>>>   #ifdef CONFIG_SPE
>>> -   unsigned long   evr[32];        /* upper 32-bits of SPE regs */
>>> -   u64             acc;            /* Accumulator */
>>> +   struct_group(spe,
>>> +           unsigned long   evr[32];        /* upper 32-bits of SPE regs */
>>> +           u64             acc;            /* Accumulator */
>>> +   );
>>>     unsigned long   spefscr;        /* SPE & eFP status */
>>>     unsigned long   spefscr_last;   /* SPEFSCR value on last prctl
>>>                                        call or trap return */
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c 
>>> b/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>>> index 0608581967f0..77b86caf5c51 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/signal_32.c
>>> @@ -532,11 +532,11 @@ static long restore_user_regs(struct pt_regs *regs,
>>>     regs_set_return_msr(regs, regs->msr & ~MSR_SPE);
>>>     if (msr & MSR_SPE) {
>>>             /* restore spe registers from the stack */
>>> -           unsafe_copy_from_user(current->thread.evr, &sr->mc_vregs,
>>> -                                 ELF_NEVRREG * sizeof(u32), failed);
>>> +           unsafe_copy_from_user(&current->thread.spe, &sr->mc_vregs,
>>> +                                 sizeof(current->thread.spe), failed);
>> 
>> This makes me nervous, because the ABI is that we copy ELF_NEVRREG *
>> sizeof(u32) bytes, not whatever sizeof(current->thread.spe) happens to
>> be.
>> 
>> ie. if we use sizeof an inadvertent change to the fields in
>> thread_struct could change how many bytes we copy out to userspace,
>> which would be an ABI break.
>> 
>> And that's not that hard to do, because it's not at all obvious that the
>> size and layout of fields in thread_struct affects the user ABI.
>> 
>> At the same time we don't want to copy the right number of bytes but
>> the wrong content, so from that point of view using sizeof is good :)
>> 
>> The way we handle it in ptrace is to have BUILD_BUG_ON()s to verify that
>> things match up, so maybe we should do that here too.
>> 
>> ie. add:
>> 
>>      BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(current->thread.spe) == ELF_NEVRREG * sizeof(u32));
>
> You mean != I guess ?

Gah. Yes I do :)

cheers

Reply via email to