netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH] net: codel: Avoid undefined behavior from signed overflow

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 Oct 2013 21:40:10 +0100
From:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH] net: codel: Avoid undefined behavior from
 signed overflow

On Thu, 31 Oct 2013 08:10:41 -0700
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 15:15 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> 
> > Okay, I'll cook up another patch, after work.
> > 
> > Adding all the typecheck() stuff, just bloats the code.
> > 
> > Would it be better/okay just to do?:
> >  (s32)((u32)(a) - (u32)(b)) > 0)
> > 
> > 
> 
> What about using the existing codel types ?

Hmm, I would be okay to use codel types for typecheck(), but I don't
like the approach below, because we are hiding a typecast.  This just
makes the code harder to read/understand. An explicit cast shows that
we are doing something nasty, on purpose here.

I would rather keep as close as possible to include/linux/jiffies.h,
because I want readers to be-able to spot this pattern.


> diff --git a/include/net/codel.h b/include/net/codel.h
> index 389cf62..89a7781 100644
> --- a/include/net/codel.h
> +++ b/include/net/codel.h
> @@ -72,7 +72,12 @@ static inline codel_time_t codel_get_time(void)
>  	return ns >> CODEL_SHIFT;
>  }
>  
> -#define codel_time_after(a, b)		((s32)(a) - (s32)(b) > 0)
> +static inline bool codel_time_after(codel_time_t a, codel_time_t b)
> +{
> +	codel_tdiff_t delta = a - b;
> +
> +	return delta >= 0;
> +}
>  #define codel_time_after_eq(a, b)	((s32)(a) - (s32)(b) >= 0)
>  #define codel_time_before(a, b)		((s32)(a) - (s32)(b) < 0)
>  #define codel_time_before_eq(a, b)	((s32)(a) - (s32)(b) <= 0)
> 
> 
> You need of course something similar for all variants.
> 
> 



-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat
  Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html