[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <54451881.3090302@oracle.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 10:13:21 -0400
From: Sasha Levin <sasha.levin@...cle.com>
To: Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
Andrey Ryabinin <a.ryabinin@...sung.com>
CC: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Michal Marek <mmarek@...e.cz>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@...ger.ca>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Konstantin Khlebnikov <koct9i@...il.com>
Subject: Re: drivers: random: Shift out-of-bounds in _mix_pool_bytes
On 10/20/2014 10:09 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 10/20/2014 03:58 PM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>> On 10/20/2014 04:49 PM, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 03:03:22PM +0400, Andrey Ryabinin wrote:
>>>> Hi, Theodore.
>>>>
>>>> I've got this while booting kernel with ubsan:
>>>>
>>>> [ 0.000000] ================================================================================
>>>> [ 0.000000] UBSan: Undefined behaviour in ../include/linux/bitops.h:107:33
>>>> [ 0.000000] shift exponent 32 is to large for 32-bit type 'unsigned int'
>>> ...
>>>> [ 0.000000] _mix_pool_bytes (/home/andrew/linux/ubsan_x86//include/linux/bitopsh:107 /home/andrew/linux/ubsan_x86//drivers/char/randomc:509)
>>>
>>> So this doesn't make any sense to me. This is triggering here:
>>>
>>> w = rol32(*bytes++, input_rotate);
>>>
>>> .... but input_rotate should never be >= 32, since it is set this way:
>>>
>>
>> It's triggering when input_rotate == 0, so UBSan complains about right shift in rol32()
>>
>> static inline __u32 rol32(__u32 word, unsigned int shift)
>> {
>> return (word << shift) | (word >> (32 - shift));
>> }
>
> So that would be the case when the entropy store's input_rotate calls
> _mix_pool_bytes() for the very first time ... I don't think it's an
> issue though.
It's an issue because it's _undefined_. For all you know gcc could return
whatever it wants as the result (42?) - no one promises you a "0" there.
Thanks,
Sasha
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists