linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fix for gcc12 compile issues in ubcmd-util.h

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]

Date:   Sat, 29 Jan 2022 09:53:48 +0100
From:   Jakub Jelinek <jakub@...hat.com>
To:     "Justin M. Forbes" <jforbes@...oraproject.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jmforbes@...uxtx.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fix for gcc12 compile issues in ubcmd-util.h

On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 07:02:14PM -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> While the current code builds fine with gcc 11, it does not with gcc 12,
> resulting in:
> 
> In file included from help.c:12:
> In function 'xrealloc',
>     inlined from 'add_cmdname' at help.c:24:2:
> subcmd-util.h:56:23: error: pointer may be used after 'realloc' [-Werror=use-after-free]
>    56 |                 ret = realloc(ptr, size);
>       |                       ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> subcmd-util.h:52:21: note: call to 'realloc' here
>    52 |         void *ret = realloc(ptr, size);
>       |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> subcmd-util.h:58:31: error: pointer may be used after 'realloc' [-Werror=use-after-free]
>    58 |                         ret = realloc(ptr, 1);
>       |                               ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> subcmd-util.h:52:21: note: call to 'realloc' here
>    52 |         void *ret = realloc(ptr, size);
>       |                     ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> The was mentioned in upstream gcc bug
> https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=104069 where it was
> determined that gcc was correct and the kernel needed to change.

This is due to the different behaviors of realloc when size is 0 as
described in http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n2396.htm#dr_400
and as the code explicitly tries to cope with !size, there is at least
theoretical chance that it is called with size 0.
In glibc/AIX, for non-NULL ptr realloc(ptr, 0) will free(ptr) and return
NULL, so the code as written in that case will in
	void *ret = realloc(ptr, 0);
	if (!ret && !0)
		ret = realloc(ptr, 1);
effectively
	free(ptr);
	ret = realloc(ptr, 1);
and so try to reallocate freed memory.  On BSD libcs it will work properly
though.

	Jakub