linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] ACPI: avoid NULL pointer arithmetic

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAK8P3a1Xmj0O8zORM9O+GLS9maqKV-awuSNQdC_zxN1z7mnjnA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 30 Sep 2021 22:36:58 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org>
To:     "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
Cc:     Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>, Robert Moore <robert.moore@...el.com>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
        Erik Kaneda <erik.kaneda@...el.com>,
        ACPI Devel Maling List <linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "open list:ACPI COMPONENT ARCHITECTURE (ACPICA)" <devel@...ica.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        llvm@...ts.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ACPI: avoid NULL pointer arithmetic

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 8:52 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 8:47 PM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 27, 2021 at 2:13 PM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > >  #define ACPI_TO_POINTER(i)              ACPI_CAST_PTR (void, (acpi_size) (i))
> > > -#define ACPI_TO_INTEGER(p)              ACPI_PTR_DIFF (p, (void *) 0)
> > > -#define ACPI_OFFSET(d, f)               ACPI_PTR_DIFF (&(((d *) 0)->f), (void *) 0)
> > > +#define ACPI_TO_INTEGER(p)              ((uintptr_t)(p))
> > > +#define ACPI_OFFSET(d, f)               offsetof(d, f)
> > >  #define ACPI_PHYSADDR_TO_PTR(i)         ACPI_TO_POINTER(i)
> > >  #define ACPI_PTR_TO_PHYSADDR(i)         ACPI_TO_INTEGER(i)
> > >
> > > --
> >
> > Queued up as 5.16 material, converted into an upstream ACPICA pull
> > request and submitted, thanks!
>
> And reverted from there, because it introduced build issues.
>
> Can we use alternative definitions that don't depend on uintptr_t and
> offsetof()?

It's a bit tricky, as both were introduced to avoid portability issues.

For uintptr_t, we could use 'unsigned long', which works on everything
that Linux can run on, but wouldn't work if this code can be compiled
for 64-bit Windows. 'size_t' probably works, but likely has the same problem
as 'uintptr_t' because they require and additional #include. I see
that some code uses acpi_uintptr_t, which looks like it is meant to
replace uintptr_t, this is defined as 'void *' in include/acpi/actypes.h,
so that probably wouldn't avoid the warning.

For offsetof(), we could use __builtin_offsetof(), which would work with
any gcc-compatible compiler, if the goal is to avoid including <stddef.h>.
If it has to work on other compilers, there is no portable way that doesn't
rely on standard headers. The best idea I'd have would be to use
"#ifdef offsetof" to choose between the trivial implementation I had
and the old one that works for non-standard C but may invoke
undefined behavior.

       Arnd