netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/8] vhost: vringh: use krealloc

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: <2767969b94fd66db1fb0fc13b5783ae65b7deb2f.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Tue, 27 Oct 2020 10:08:02 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
Cc:     "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl>,
        Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>,
        Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>,
        Gustavo Padovan <gustavo@...ovan.org>,
        Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
        Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@...nel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
        Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
        Maarten Lankhorst <maarten.lankhorst@...ux.intel.com>,
        Maxime Ripard <mripard@...nel.org>,
        Thomas Zimmermann <tzimmermann@...e.de>,
        David Airlie <airlied@...ux.ie>,
        Daniel Vetter <daniel@...ll.ch>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Linus Walleij <linus.walleij@...aro.org>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
        Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>,
        Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
        David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
        Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Jaroslav Kysela <perex@...ex.cz>,
        Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
        linux-media <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-drm <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>,
        linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-edac@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-gpio <linux-gpio@...r.kernel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
        virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
        Linux-ALSA <alsa-devel@...a-project.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] vhost: vringh: use krealloc_array()

On Tue, 2020-10-27 at 17:58 +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 5:50 PM Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com> wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 2020-10-27 at 11:28 -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 27, 2020 at 01:17:20PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> > > > 
> > > > Use the helper that checks for overflows internally instead of manually
> > > > calculating the size of the new array.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bgolaszewski@...libre.com>
> > > 
> > > No problem with the patch, it does introduce some symmetry in the code.
> > 
> > Perhaps more symmetry by using kmemdup
> > ---
> >  drivers/vhost/vringh.c | 23 ++++++++++-------------
> >  1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > index 8bd8b403f087..99222a3651cd 100644
> > --- a/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > +++ b/drivers/vhost/vringh.c
> > @@ -191,26 +191,23 @@ static int move_to_indirect(const struct vringh *vrh,
> >  static int resize_iovec(struct vringh_kiov *iov, gfp_t gfp)
> >  {
> >         struct kvec *new;
> > -       unsigned int flag, new_num = (iov->max_num & ~VRINGH_IOV_ALLOCATED) * 2;
> > +       size_t new_num = (iov->max_num & ~VRINGH_IOV_ALLOCATED) * 2;
> > +       size_t size;
> > 
> >         if (new_num < 8)
> >                 new_num = 8;
> > 
> > -       flag = (iov->max_num & VRINGH_IOV_ALLOCATED);
> > -       if (flag)
> > -               new = krealloc(iov->iov, new_num * sizeof(struct iovec), gfp);
> > -       else {
> > -               new = kmalloc_array(new_num, sizeof(struct iovec), gfp);
> > -               if (new) {
> > -                       memcpy(new, iov->iov,
> > -                              iov->max_num * sizeof(struct iovec));
> > -                       flag = VRINGH_IOV_ALLOCATED;
> > -               }
> > -       }
> > +       if (unlikely(check_mul_overflow(new_num, sizeof(struct iovec), &size)))
> > +               return -ENOMEM;
> > +
> 
> The whole point of using helpers such as kmalloc_array() is not doing
> these checks manually.

Tradeoffs for in readability for overflow and not mistyping or doing
the multiplication of iov->max_num * sizeof(struct iovec) twice.

Just fyi:

the realloc doesn't do a multiplication overflow test as written so the
suggestion is slightly more resistant to defect.