linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix Warnining in arch/x86/kernel/signal.c

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:	Wed, 13 May 2009 11:20:07 +0900
From:	Hiroshi Shimamoto <h-shimamoto@...jp.nec.com>
To:	Subrata Modak <subrata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
CC:	x86@...nel.org, Sachin P Sant <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
	Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix Warnining in arch/x86/kernel/signal.c

Subrata Modak wrote:
> Hi,
> 
>> On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 17:16 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
>> On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 05:16:14PM +0530, Subrata Modak wrote:
>>
>> Hi Subrata,
>>
>>> With gcc (GCC) 4.4.1 20090429 (prerelease), i get the following build warning:
>> Patch looks good (you can add a 
>> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>)
>> But I don't maintain this code anymore. Please resend to x86@...nel.org
>> cc linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org for merge.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> -Andi
> 
> 
> With gcc (GCC) 4.4.1 20090429 (prerelease), i get the following build warning:
> 
> CC      arch/x86/kernel/signal.o
> arch/x86/kernel/signal.c: In function ‘sys_sigreturn’:
> arch/x86/kernel/signal.c:573: warning: ‘set.sig[1]’ may be used uninitialized in this function
> 
> On investigation i found that this is because of the evaluation
> precedence of the expression below:
> 
> 569 unsigned long sys_sigreturn(struct pt_regs *regs)
> 570 {
> 571         struct sigframe __user *frame;
> 572         unsigned long ax;
> 573         sigset_t set;
> 574 
> 575         frame = (struct sigframe __user *)(regs->sp - 8);
> 576 
> 577         if (!access_ok(VERIFY_READ, frame, sizeof(*frame)))
> 578                 goto badframe;
> 579         if (__get_user(set.sig[0], &frame->sc.oldmask) || (_NSIG_WORDS > 1
> 580                 && __copy_from_user(&set.sig[1], &frame->extramask,
> 581                                     sizeof(frame->extramask))))
> 
> The initialization for set.sig[1] may not occur if
> 	__get_user(set.sig[0], &frame->sc.oldmask)
> evalutes to true. So, the compiler is complaining.
> 
> I have devised a small patch for this which wanes away this warning
> without changing the conditional evaluation criteria. Let me know if
> you like this patch.
> 
> 582                 goto badframe;
> 583 
> 584         sigdelsetmask(&set, ~_BLOCKABLE);
> 585         spin_lock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
> 586         current->blocked = set;
> 587         recalc_sigpending();
> 588         spin_unlock_irq(&current->sighand->siglock);
> 589 
> 590         if (restore_sigcontext(regs, &frame->sc, &ax))
> 591                 goto badframe;
> 592         return ax;
> 593 
> 594 badframe:
> 595         signal_fault(regs, frame, "sigreturn");
> 596 
> 597         return 0;
> 598 }
> 
> Signed-Off-By: Subrata Modak <subrata@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> To: <x86@...nel.org>
> Cc: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
> Cc: Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Cc: Sachin P Sant <sachinp@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix Warnining in arch/x86/kernel/signal.c
> ---
> 
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c	2009-05-12 10:59:24.000000000 +0530
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/signal.c	2009-05-12 16:57:32.000000000 +0530
> @@ -576,9 +576,10 @@ unsigned long sys_sigreturn(struct pt_re
>  
>  	if (!access_ok(VERIFY_READ, frame, sizeof(*frame)))
>  		goto badframe;
> -	if (__get_user(set.sig[0], &frame->sc.oldmask) || (_NSIG_WORDS > 1
> -		&& __copy_from_user(&set.sig[1], &frame->extramask,
> -				    sizeof(frame->extramask))))
> +
> +        if ( (__copy_from_user(&set.sig[1], &frame->extramask,
> +                sizeof(frame->extramask)) && _NSIG_WORDS > 1) || 
> +                __get_user(set.sig[0], &frame->sc.oldmask))
>  		goto badframe;

I'm not sure why this eliminates that warning.
set.sig[0] may not be initialized too, if __copy_from_user() failed.
I don't have enough time to look at this right now, sorry.

Another question, __copy_from_user() will be called even if
_NSIG_WORDS is less than 2, perhaps it never occurs.
I think, to check _NSIG_WORDS > 1 before calling __copy_from_user()
is better.

Thanks,
Hiroshi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/