netdev - [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized

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]

Message-Id: <20200603233203.1695403-2-keescook@chromium.org>
Date:   Wed,  3 Jun 2020 16:31:54 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Miguel Ojeda <miguel.ojeda.sandonis@...il.com>,
        Alexander Potapenko <glider@...gle.com>,
        Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>,
        Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        drbd-dev@...ts.linbit.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
        b43-dev@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-clk@...r.kernel.org, linux-spi@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-mm@...ck.org, clang-built-linux@...glegroups.com
Subject: [PATCH 01/10] x86/mm/numa: Remove uninitialized_var() usage

Using uninitialized_var() is dangerous as it papers over real bugs[1]
(or can in the future), and suppresses unrelated compiler warnings (e.g.
"unused variable"). If the compiler thinks it is uninitialized, either
simply initialize the variable or make compiler changes. As a precursor
to removing[2] this[3] macro[4], refactor code to avoid its need.

The original reason for its use here was to work around the #ifdef
being the only place the variable was used. This is better expressed
using IS_ENABLED() and a new code block where the variable can be used
unconditionally.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200603174714.192027-1-glider@google.com/
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFw+Vbj0i=1TGqCR5vQkCzWJ0QxK6CernOU6eedsudAixw@mail.gmail.com/
[3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFwgbgqhbp1fkxvRKEpzyR5J8n1vKT1VZdz9knmPuXhOeg@mail.gmail.com/
[4] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CA+55aFz2500WfbKXAx8s67wrm9=yVJu65TpLgN_ybYNv0VEOKA@mail.gmail.com/

Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
---
 arch/x86/mm/numa.c                | 18 +++++++++---------
 include/linux/page-flags-layout.h |  2 +-
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
index 59ba008504dc..38eeb15f3b07 100644
--- a/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
+++ b/arch/x86/mm/numa.c
@@ -541,7 +541,6 @@ static void __init numa_clear_kernel_node_hotplug(void)
 
 static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 {
-	unsigned long uninitialized_var(pfn_align);
 	int i, nid;
 
 	/* Account for nodes with cpus and no memory */
@@ -569,15 +568,16 @@ static int __init numa_register_memblks(struct numa_meminfo *mi)
 	 * If sections array is gonna be used for pfn -> nid mapping, check
 	 * whether its granularity is fine enough.
 	 */
-#ifdef NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
-	pfn_align = node_map_pfn_alignment();
-	if (pfn_align && pfn_align < PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
-		printk(KERN_WARNING "Node alignment %LuMB < min %LuMB, rejecting NUMA config\n",
-		       PFN_PHYS(pfn_align) >> 20,
-		       PFN_PHYS(PAGES_PER_SECTION) >> 20);
-		return -EINVAL;
+	if (IS_ENABLED(NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS)) {
+		unsigned long pfn_align = node_map_pfn_alignment();
+
+		if (pfn_align && pfn_align < PAGES_PER_SECTION) {
+			pr_warn("Node alignment %LuMB < min %LuMB, rejecting NUMA config\n",
+				PFN_PHYS(pfn_align) >> 20,
+				PFN_PHYS(PAGES_PER_SECTION) >> 20);
+			return -EINVAL;
+		}
 	}
-#endif
 	if (!numa_meminfo_cover_memory(mi))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
diff --git a/include/linux/page-flags-layout.h b/include/linux/page-flags-layout.h
index 71283739ffd2..1a4cdec2bd29 100644
--- a/include/linux/page-flags-layout.h
+++ b/include/linux/page-flags-layout.h
@@ -100,7 +100,7 @@
  * there.  This includes the case where there is no node, so it is implicit.
  */
 #if !(NODES_WIDTH > 0 || NODES_SHIFT == 0)
-#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS
+#define NODE_NOT_IN_PAGE_FLAGS 1
 #endif
 
 #if defined(CONFIG_NUMA_BALANCING) && LAST_CPUPID_WIDTH == 0
-- 
2.25.1