linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH][V2] x86/lib: Fix overflow of variable m when val >= 1410065408

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:   Fri, 3 Nov 2023 10:08:45 +0800
From:   Su Hui <suhui@...china.com>
To:     Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:     kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][V2] x86/lib: Fix overflow of variable m when val >=
 1410065408

On 2023/11/3 01:49, Colin Ian King wrote:
> There is an overflow in variable m in function num_digits when val
> is >= 1410065408 which leads to the digit calculation loop to
> iterate more times than required. This results in either more
> digits being counted or in some cases (for example where val is
> 1932683193) the value of m eventually overflows to zero and the
> while loop spins forever).
>
> Currently the function num_digits is currently only being used for
> small values of val in the SMP boot stage for digit counting on the
> number of cpus and NUMA nodes, so the overflow is never encountered.
> However it is useful to fix the overflow issue in case the function
> is used for other purposes in the future. (The issue was discovered
> while investigating the digit counting performance in various
> kernel helper functions rather than any real-world use-case).
>
> The simplest fix is to make m a long long, the overhead in
> multiplication speed for a long long is very minor for small values
> of val less than 10000 on modern processors. The alternative
> fix is to replace the multiplication with a constant division
> by 10 loop (this compiles down to an multiplication and shift)
> without needing to make m a long long, but this is slightly slower
> than the fix in this commit when measured on a range of x86
> processors).
>
> Fixes: 646e29a1789a ("x86: Improve the printout of the SMP bootup CPU table")
> Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.i.king@...il.com>
> ---
>
> V2: Make m long long instead of long to fix issue for i386 as well as
>      x86-64
> ---
>   arch/x86/lib/misc.c | 2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/lib/misc.c b/arch/x86/lib/misc.c
> index 92cd8ecc3a2c..41e26e246d8f 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/lib/misc.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/lib/misc.c
> @@ -8,7 +8,7 @@
>    */
>   int num_digits(int val)

Hi,

num_digits() still has a problem when val = INT_MIN.
  14         if (val < 0) {
  15                 d++;
  16                 val = -val;
                     ^^^^^^^^^^^
When val = INT_MIN, -val still equal to INT_MIN.
Make 'val' long long instead of int to fix this issue.

Su Hui


>   {
> -	int m = 10;
> +	long long m = 10;
>   	int d = 1;
>   
>   	if (val < 0) {