On 7/8/24 21:18, Kees Cook wrote:
The allocator will already reject giant sizes seen from negative size
arguments, so this commit mainly services as an example for initial
type-based filtering. The size argument is checked for negative values
in signed arguments, saturating any if found instead of passing them on.
For example, now the size is checked:
Before:
/* %rdi unchecked */
1eb: be c0 0c 00 00 mov $0xcc0,%esi
1f0: e8 00 00 00 00 call 1f5 <do_SLAB_NEGATIVE+0x15>
1f1: R_X86_64_PLT32 __kmalloc_noprof-0x4
After:
6d0: 48 63 c7 movslq %edi,%rax
6d3: 85 ff test %edi,%edi
6d5: be c0 0c 00 00 mov $0xcc0,%esi
6da: 48 c7 c2 ff ff ff ff mov $0xffffffffffffffff,%rdx
6e1: 48 0f 49 d0 cmovns %rax,%rdx
6e5: 48 89 d7 mov %rdx,%rdi
6e8: e8 00 00 00 00 call 6ed <do_SLAB_NEGATIVE+0x1d>
6e9: R_X86_64_PLT32 __kmalloc_noprof-0x4
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <[email protected]>
---
Cc: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>
Cc: Pekka Enberg <[email protected]>
Cc: David Rientjes <[email protected]>
Cc: Joonsoo Kim <[email protected]>
Cc: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
Cc: Vlastimil Babka <[email protected]>
Cc: Roman Gushchin <[email protected]>
Cc: Hyeonggon Yoo <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
---
include/linux/slab.h | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/slab.h b/include/linux/slab.h
index d99afce36098..7353756cbec6 100644
--- a/include/linux/slab.h
+++ b/include/linux/slab.h
@@ -684,7 +684,24 @@ static __always_inline __alloc_size(1) void
*kmalloc_noprof(size_t size, gfp_t f
}
return __kmalloc_noprof(size, flags);
}
-#define kmalloc(...)
alloc_hooks(kmalloc_noprof(__VA_ARGS__))
+#define kmalloc_sized(...)
alloc_hooks(kmalloc_noprof(__VA_ARGS__))
+
+#define __size_force_positive(x) \
+ ({ \
+ typeof(__force_integral_expr(x)) __forced_val = \
+ __force_integral_expr(x); \
+ __forced_val < 0 ? SIZE_MAX : __forced_val; \
+ })
+
+#define kmalloc(p, gfp) _Generic((p), \
+ unsigned char: kmalloc_sized(__force_integral_expr(p), gfp), \
+ unsigned short: kmalloc_sized(__force_integral_expr(p), gfp), \
+ unsigned int: kmalloc_sized(__force_integral_expr(p), gfp), \
+ unsigned long: kmalloc_sized(__force_integral_expr(p), gfp), \
+ signed char: kmalloc_sized(__size_force_positive(p), gfp), \
+ signed short: kmalloc_sized(__size_force_positive(p), gfp), \
+ signed int: kmalloc_sized(__size_force_positive(p), gfp), \
+ signed long: kmalloc_sized(__size_force_positive(p), gfp))
I like this idea and series very much, thank you!
What about bool?
What about long long?
(by this commit one will get a rather easy to parse compile error, but
the next one will obscure it a bit)
Consider the following correct (albeit somewhat weird) code:
/* header */
char *state;
/* .c impl, init part */
bool needs_state = some_expr();
state = kmalloc(needs_state, GFP_KERNEL);
/* .c, other part */
if (ZERO_OR_NULL_PTR(state))
return _EARLY;
*state = state_machine_action(*state);
#define kmem_buckets_alloc(_b, _size, _flags) \
alloc_hooks(__kmalloc_node_noprof(PASS_BUCKET_PARAMS(_size, _b),
_flags, NUMA_NO_NODE))
