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  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, 9 Sep 2021 13:27:52 -0700
From:   Andrew Morton <>
To:     Kees Cook <>
Cc:     kernel test robot <>,
        Matt Porter <>,
        Alexandre Bounine <>,
        Jing Xiangfeng <>,
        Ira Weiny <>,
        John Hubbard <>,
        Souptick Joarder <>,
        "Gustavo A . R . Silva" <>,
        Dan Carpenter <>,,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rapidio: Avoid bogus __alloc_size warning

On Thu,  9 Sep 2021 09:14:09 -0700 Kees Cook <> wrote:

> GCC 9.3 (but not later) incorrectly evaluates the arguments to
> check_copy_size(), getting seemingly confused by the size being returned
> from array_size(). Instead, perform the calculation once, which both
> makes the code more readable and avoids the bug in GCC.
>    In file included from arch/x86/include/asm/preempt.h:7,
>                     from include/linux/preempt.h:78,
>                     from include/linux/spinlock.h:55,
>                     from include/linux/mm_types.h:9,
>                     from include/linux/buildid.h:5,
>                     from include/linux/module.h:14,
>                     from drivers/rapidio/devices/rio_mport_cdev.c:13:
>    In function 'check_copy_size',
>        inlined from 'copy_from_user' at include/linux/uaccess.h:191:6,
>        inlined from 'rio_mport_transfer_ioctl' at drivers/rapidio/devices/rio_mport_cdev.c:983:6:
>    include/linux/thread_info.h:213:4: error: call to '__bad_copy_to' declared with attribute error: copy destination size is too small
>      213 |    __bad_copy_to();
>          |    ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> But the allocation size and the copy size are identical:
> 	transfer = vmalloc(array_size(sizeof(*transfer), transaction.count));
> 	if (!transfer)
> 		return -ENOMEM;
> 	if (unlikely(copy_from_user(transfer,
> 				    (void __user *)(uintptr_t)transaction.block,
> 				    array_size(sizeof(*transfer), transaction.count)))) {

That's an "error", not a warning.  Or is this thanks to the new -Werror?

Either way, I'm inclined to cc:stable on this, because use of gcc-9 on
older kernels will be a common thing down the ages.

If it's really an "error" on non-Werror kernels then definitely cc:stable.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists