linux-kernel - [PATCH 3.12 46/56] ext4: address UBSAN warning in mb_find_order_for

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]

Message-Id: <da4e18a8b689c6735d337c239994db66c6a16a58.1465975780.git.jslaby@suse.cz>
Date:	Wed, 15 Jun 2016 09:31:10 +0200
From:	Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
To:	stable@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>,
	Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
Subject: [PATCH 3.12 46/56] ext4: address UBSAN warning in mb_find_order_for_block()

From: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>

3.12-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

===============

commit b5cb316cdf3a3f5f6125412b0f6065185240cfdc upstream.

Currently, in mb_find_order_for_block(), there's a loop like the following:

  while (order <= e4b->bd_blkbits + 1) {
    ...
    bb += 1 << (e4b->bd_blkbits - order);
  }

Note that the updated bb is used in the loop's next iteration only.

However, at the last iteration, that is at order == e4b->bd_blkbits + 1,
the shift count becomes negative (c.f. C99 6.5.7(3)) and UBSAN reports

  UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in fs/ext4/mballoc.c:1281:11
  shift exponent -1 is negative
  [...]
  Call Trace:
   [<ffffffff818c4d35>] dump_stack+0xbc/0x117
   [<ffffffff818c4c79>] ? _atomic_dec_and_lock+0x169/0x169
   [<ffffffff819411bb>] ubsan_epilogue+0xd/0x4e
   [<ffffffff81941cbc>] __ubsan_handle_shift_out_of_bounds+0x1fb/0x254
   [<ffffffff81941ac1>] ? __ubsan_handle_load_invalid_value+0x158/0x158
   [<ffffffff816e93a0>] ? ext4_mb_generate_from_pa+0x590/0x590
   [<ffffffff816502c8>] ? ext4_read_block_bitmap_nowait+0x598/0xe80
   [<ffffffff816e7b7e>] mb_find_order_for_block+0x1ce/0x240
   [...]

Unless compilers start to do some fancy transformations (which at least
GCC 6.0.0 doesn't currently do), the issue is of cosmetic nature only: the
such calculated value of bb is never used again.

Silence UBSAN by introducing another variable, bb_incr, holding the next
increment to apply to bb and adjust that one by right shifting it by one
position per loop iteration.

Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=114701
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=112161

Signed-off-by: Nicolai Stange <nicstange@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>
---
 fs/ext4/mballoc.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
index c4a5e4df8ca3..4d42e50ab0a0 100644
--- a/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
+++ b/fs/ext4/mballoc.c
@@ -1236,6 +1236,7 @@ static void ext4_mb_unload_buddy(struct ext4_buddy *e4b)
 static int mb_find_order_for_block(struct ext4_buddy *e4b, int block)
 {
 	int order = 1;
+	int bb_incr = 1 << (e4b->bd_blkbits - 1);
 	void *bb;
 
 	BUG_ON(e4b->bd_bitmap == e4b->bd_buddy);
@@ -1248,7 +1249,8 @@ static int mb_find_order_for_block(struct ext4_buddy *e4b, int block)
 			/* this block is part of buddy of order 'order' */
 			return order;
 		}
-		bb += 1 << (e4b->bd_blkbits - order);
+		bb += bb_incr;
+		bb_incr >>= 1;
 		order++;
 	}
 	return 0;
-- 
2.9.0