[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 20:27:22 +0200
From: Rasmus Villemoes <linux@...musvillemoes.dk>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, Matthew Wilcox <mawilcox@...rosoft.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/13] overflow.h: Add allocation size calculation helpers
On 2018-05-09 02:42, Kees Cook wrote:
> In preparation for replacing unchecked overflows for memory allocations,
> this creates helpers for the 3 most common calculations:
>
> array_size(a, b): 2-dimensional array
> array3_size(a, b, c): 2-dimensional array
yeah... complete confusion...
> +/**
> + * array_size() - Calculate size of 2-dimensional array.
> + *
> + * @a: dimension one
> + * @b: dimension two
> + *
> + * Calculates size of 2-dimensional array: @a * @b.
> + *
> + * Returns: number of bytes needed to represent the array or SIZE_MAX on
> + * overflow.
> + */
> +static inline __must_check size_t array_size(size_t a, size_t b)
> +{
> + size_t bytes;
> +
> + if (check_mul_overflow(a, b, &bytes))
> + return SIZE_MAX;
> +
> + return bytes;
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * array3_size() - Calculate size of 3-dimensional array.
> + *
...IDGI. array_size is/will most often be used to calculate the size of
a one-dimensional array, count*elemsize, accessed as foo[i]. Won't a
three-factor product usually be dim1*dim2*elemsize, i.e. 2-dimensional,
accessed (because C is lame) as foo[i*dim2 + j]?
> +/**
> + * struct_size() - Calculate size of structure with trailing array.
> + * @p: Pointer to the structure.
> + * @member: Name of the array member.
> + * @n: Number of elements in the array.
> + *
> + * Calculates size of memory needed for structure @p followed by an
> + * array of @n @member elements.
> + *
> + * Return: number of bytes needed or SIZE_MAX on overflow.
> + */
> +#define struct_size(p, member, n) \
> + __ab_c_size(n, \
> + sizeof(*(p)->member) + __must_be_array((p)->member),\
> + offsetof(typeof(*(p)), member))
> +
> +
struct s { int a; char b; char c[]; } has sizeof > offsetof(c), so for
small enough n, we end up allocating less than sizeof(struct s). And the
caller might reasonably do memset(s, 0, sizeof(*s)) to initialize all
members before c. In practice our allocators round up to a multiple of
8, so I don't think it's a big problem, but some sanitizer might
complain. But I do think you should make that addend sizeof() instead of
offsetof().
Rasmus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
