linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] divide by 3*sizeof(u32) when computing array

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:   Tue, 13 Jul 2021 12:22:53 +0100
From:   "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@...linux.org.uk>
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:     Uwe Kleine-König 
        <u.kleine-koenig@...gutronix.de>,
        Salah Triki <salah.triki@...il.com>,
        "fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com" <fabrice.gasnier@...s.st.com>,
        "thierry.reding@...il.com" <thierry.reding@...il.com>,
        "lee.jones@...aro.org" <lee.jones@...aro.org>,
        "mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com" <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        "alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com" <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        "linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pwm@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com" 
        <linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] divide by 3*sizeof(u32) when computing array_size

On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 11:07:00AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Russell King
> > Sent: 13 July 2021 10:20
> ....
> > I would also note that the code relies on there being no padding in
> > struct stm32_breakinput - it should be noted that a strict
> > interpretation of the C standard allows padding to be added anywhere
> > to a structure - at the start, end or between members.
> 
> I'm pretty certain I remember that padding before the first member
> isn't allowed.

You may be right there.

> In any case the kernel generally assumes there is no extra padding.
> (eg for structures that map hardware registers.)

That's incorrect. Places where we care either generally end up with
__packed or are carefully layed out to ensure members are naturally
aligned to reduce the likelyhood of it. 32-bit OABI ARM has been
particularly "fun" in this respect.

> For big structures it is worth adding a compile-time check of
> the structure size - but not really for three u32.

Sorry, structure size has absolutely nothing to do with whether it's
a good idea to have a compile-time check. The deciding factor is
whether the code relies on some property such as it being a certain
size. Such as in this exact case. If you grep for "BUILD_BUG_ON.*sizeof"
in fs/ for example, this illustrates the point rather well.

-- 
RMK's Patch system: https://www.armlinux.org.uk/developer/patches/
FTTP is here! 40Mbps down 10Mbps up. Decent connectivity at last!