Message-Id: <3E304FB2-799D-478F-889A-CDFC1A52DCD8@toblux.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2024 17:28:12 +0200
From: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@...lux.com>
To: Jan Hendrik Farr <kernel@...rr.cc>
Cc: kent.overstreet@...ux.dev,
 regressions@...ts.linux.dev,
 linux-bcachefs@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-hardening@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [REGRESSION][BISECTED] erroneous buffer overflow detected in
 bch2_xattr_validate

Hi Jan,

On 26. Sep 2024, at 17:14, Jan Hendrik Farr <kernel@...rr.cc> wrote:
> 
> Hi Kent,
> 
> found a strange regression in the patch set for 6.12.
> 
> First bad commit is: 86e92eeeb23741a072fe7532db663250ff2e726a
> bcachefs: Annotate struct bch_xattr with __counted_by()
> 
> When compiling with clang 18.1.8 (also with latest llvm main branch) and
> CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=y my rootfs does not mount because there is an erroneous
> detection of a buffer overflow.
> 
> The __counted_by attribute is supposed to be supported starting with gcc 15,
> not sure if it is implemented yet so I haven't tested with gcc trunk yet.
> 
> Here's the relevant section of dmesg:
> 
> [    6.248736] bcachefs (nvme1n1p2): starting version 1.12: rebalance_work_acct_fix
> [    6.248744] bcachefs (nvme1n1p2): recovering from clean shutdown, journal seq 1305969
> [    6.252374] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> [    6.252375] memchr: detected buffer overflow: 12 byte read of buffer size 0
> [    6.252379] WARNING: CPU: 18 PID: 511 at lib/string_helpers.c:1033 __fortify_report+0x45/0x50
> [    6.252383] Modules linked in: bcachefs lz4hc_compress lz4_compress hid_generic usbhid btrfs crct10dif_pclmul libcrc32c crc32_pclmul crc32c_generic polyval_clmulni crc32c_intel polyval_generic raid6_pq ghash_clmulni_intel xor sha512_ssse3 sha256_ssse3 sha1_ssse3 aesni_intel gf128mul nvme crypto_simd ccp xhci_pci cryptd sp5100_tco xhci_pci_renesas nvme_core nvme_auth video wmi ip6_tables ip_tables x_tables i2c_dev
> [    6.252404] CPU: 18 UID: 0 PID: 511 Comm: mount Not tainted 6.11.0-10065-g6fa6588e5964 #98 d8e0beb515d91b387aa60970de7203f35ddd182c
> [    6.252406] Hardware name: Micro-Star International Co., Ltd. MS-7D78/PRO B650-P WIFI (MS-7D78), BIOS 1.C0 02/06/2024
> [    6.252407] RIP: 0010:__fortify_report+0x45/0x50
> [    6.252409] Code: 48 8b 34 c5 30 92 21 87 40 f6 c7 01 48 c7 c0 75 1b 0a 87 48 c7 c1 e1 93 07 87 48 0f 44 c8 48 c7 c7 ef 03 10 87 e8 0b c2 9b ff <0f> 0b e9 cf 5d 9e 00 cc cc cc cc 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90 90
> [    6.252410] RSP: 0018:ffffbb3d03aff350 EFLAGS: 00010246
> [    6.252412] RAX: 4ce590fb7c372800 RBX: ffff98d559a400e8 RCX: 0000000000000027
> [    6.252413] RDX: 0000000000000002 RSI: 00000000ffffdfff RDI: ffff98e43db21a08
> [    6.252414] RBP: ffff98d559a400d0 R08: 0000000000001fff R09: ffff98e47ddcd000
> [    6.252415] R10: 0000000000005ffd R11: 0000000000000004 R12: ffff98d559a40000
> [    6.252416] R13: ffff98d54abf1320 R14: ffffbb3d03aff430 R15: 0000000000000000
> [    6.252417] FS:  00007efc82117800(0000) GS:ffff98e43db00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000
> [    6.252418] CS:  0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033
> [    6.252419] CR2: 000055d96658ea80 CR3: 000000010a12c000 CR4: 0000000000f50ef0
> [    6.252420] PKRU: 55555554
> [    6.252421] Call Trace:
> [    6.252423]  <TASK>
> [    6.252425]  ? __warn+0xd5/0x1d0
> [    6.252427]  ? __fortify_report+0x45/0x50
> [    6.252429]  ? report_bug+0x144/0x1f0
> [    6.252431]  ? __fortify_report+0x45/0x50
> [    6.252433]  ? handle_bug+0x6a/0x90
> [    6.252435]  ? exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x50
> [    6.252436]  ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1a/0x20
> [    6.252440]  ? __fortify_report+0x45/0x50
> [    6.252441]  __fortify_panic+0x9/0x10
> [    6.252443]  bch2_xattr_validate+0x13b/0x140 [bcachefs 8361179bbfcc59e669df38aec976f02d7211a659]
> [    6.252463]  bch2_btree_node_read_done+0x125a/0x17a0 [bcachefs 8361179bbfcc59e669df38aec976f02d7211a659]
> [    6.252482]  btree_node_read_work+0x202/0x4a0 [bcachefs 8361179bbfcc59e669df38aec976f02d7211a659]
> [    6.252499]  bch2_btree_node_read+0xa8d/0xb20 [bcachefs 8361179bbfcc59e669df38aec976f02d7211a659]
> [    6.252514]  ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [    6.252515]  ? pcpu_alloc_noprof+0x741/0xb50
> [    6.252517]  ? srso_alias_return_thunk+0x5/0xfbef5
> [    6.252519]  ? time_stats_update_one+0x75/0x1f0 [bcachefs 8361179bbfcc59e669df38aec976f02d7211a659]
> 
> ...
> 
> 
> The memchr in question is at:
> https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/11a299a7933e03c83818b431e6a1c53ad387423d/fs/bcachefs/xattr.c#L99
> 
> There is not actually a buffer overflow here, I checked with gdb that
> xattr.v->x_name does actually contain a string of the correct length and
> xattr.v->x_name_len contains the correct length and should be used to determine
> the length when memchr uses __struct_size for bounds-checking due to the
> __counted_by annotation.
> 
> I'm at the point where I think this is probably a bug in clang. I have a patch
> that does fix (more like bandaid) the problem and adds some print statements:
> 
> --
> diff --git a/fs/bcachefs/xattr.c b/fs/bcachefs/xattr.c
> index 56c8d3fe55a4..8d7e749b7dda 100644
> --- a/fs/bcachefs/xattr.c
> +++ b/fs/bcachefs/xattr.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ int bch2_xattr_validate(struct bch_fs *c, struct bkey_s_c k,
>       enum bch_validate_flags flags)
> {
> struct bkey_s_c_xattr xattr = bkey_s_c_to_xattr(k);
> + const struct bch_xattr *v = (void *)k.v;
> unsigned val_u64s = xattr_val_u64s(xattr.v->x_name_len,
>   le16_to_cpu(xattr.v->x_val_len));
> int ret = 0;
> @@ -94,9 +95,12 @@ int bch2_xattr_validate(struct bch_fs *c, struct bkey_s_c k,
> 
> bkey_fsck_err_on(!bch2_xattr_type_to_handler(xattr.v->x_type),
> c, xattr_invalid_type,
> - "invalid type (%u)", xattr.v->x_type);
> + "invalid type (%u)", v->x_type);
> 
> - bkey_fsck_err_on(memchr(xattr.v->x_name, '\0', xattr.v->x_name_len),
> + pr_info("x_name_len: %d", v->x_name_len);
> + pr_info("__struct_size(x_name): %ld", __struct_size(v->x_name));
> + pr_info("__struct_size(x_name): %ld", __struct_size(xattr.v->x_name));
> + bkey_fsck_err_on(memchr(v->x_name, '\0', v->x_name_len),
> c, xattr_name_invalid_chars,
> "xattr name has invalid characters");
> fsck_err:
> --
> 
> 
> Making memchr access via a pointer created with
> const struct bch_xattr *v = (void *)k.v fixes it. From the print statements I
> can see that __struct_size(xattr.v->x_name) incorrectly returns 0, while
> __struct_size(v->x_name) correctly returns 10 in this case (the value of
> x_name_len).
> 
> The generated assembly illustrates what is going wrong. Below is an excerpt
> of the assembly clang generated for the bch2_xattr_validate function:
> 
> mov r13d, ecx
> mov r15, rdi
> mov r14, rsi
> mov rdi, offset .L.str.3
> mov rsi, offset .L__func__.bch2_xattr_validate
> mov rbx, rdx
> mov edx, eax
> call _printk
> movzx edx, byte ptr [rbx + 1]
> mov rdi, offset .L.str.4
> mov rsi, offset .L__func__.bch2_xattr_validate
> call _printk
> movzx edx, bh
> mov rdi, offset .L.str.4
> mov rsi, offset .L__func__.bch2_xattr_validate
> call _printk
> lea rdi, [rbx + 4]
> mov r12, rbx
> movzx edx, byte ptr [rbx + 1]
> xor ebx, ebx
> xor esi, esi
> call memchr
> 
> At the start of this rdx contains k.v (and is moved into rbx). The three calls
> to printk are the ones you can see in my patch. You can see that for the
> print that uses __struct_size(v->x_name) the compiler correctly uses
> movzx edx, byte ptr [rbx + 1]
> to load x_name_len into edx.
> 
> For the printk call that uses __struct_size(xattr.v->x_name) however the
> compiler uses
> movzx edx, bh
> So it will print the high 8 bits of the lower 16 bits (second least
> significant byte) of the memory address of xattr.v->x_type. This is obviously
> completely wrong.
> 
> It is then doing the correct call of memchr because this is using my patch.
> Without my patch it would be doing the same thing for the call to memchr where
> it uses the second least significant byte of the memory address of x_type as the
> length used for the bounds-check.
> 
> 
> 
> The LLVM IR also shows the same problem:
> 
> define internal zeroext i1 @xattr_cmp_key(ptr nocapture readnone %0, ptr %1, ptr nocapture noundef readonly %2) #0 align 16 {
>  [...]
>  %51 = ptrtoint ptr %2 to i64
>  %52 = lshr i64 %51, 8
>  %53 = and i64 %52, 255
> 
> This is the IR for the incorrect behavior. It simply converts the pointer to an
> int, shifts right by 8 bits, then and with 0xFF. If it did a load (to i64)
> instead of ptrtoint this would actually work, as the second least significant
> bit of an i64 loaded from that memory address does contain the value of
> x_name_len. It's as if clang forgot to dereference a pointer here.
> 
> Correct IR does this (for the other printk invocation):
> 
> define internal zeroext i1 @xattr_cmp_key(ptr nocapture readnone %0, ptr %1, ptr nocapture noundef readonly %2) #0 align 16 {
>  [...]
>  %4 = getelementptr inbounds %struct.bch_xattr, ptr %1, i64 0, i32 1
>  %5 = load i8, ptr %4, align 8
>  [...]
>  %48 = load i8, ptr %5, align 4
>  %49 = zext i8 %48 to i64
> 
> Best Regards
> Jan

I suspect it's the same Clang __bdos() "bug" as in [1] and [2].

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-kernel/3D0816D1-0807-4D37-8D5F-3C55CA910FAA@linux.dev/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240913164630.GA4091534@thelio-3990X/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists