Commit f0907827 authored by Rasmus Villemoes's avatar Rasmus Villemoes Committed by Kees Cook
Browse files

compiler.h: enable builtin overflow checkers and add fallback code

This adds wrappers for the __builtin overflow checkers present in gcc
5.1+ as well as fallback implementations for earlier compilers. It's not
that easy to implement the fully generic __builtin_X_overflow(T1 a, T2
b, T3 *d) in macros, so the fallback code assumes that T1, T2 and T3 are
the same. We obviously don't want the wrappers to have different
semantics depending on $GCC_VERSION, so we also insist on that even when
using the builtins.

There are a few problems with the 'a+b < a' idiom for checking for
overflow: For signed types, it relies on undefined behaviour and is
not actually complete (it doesn't check underflow;
e.g. INT_MIN+INT_MIN == 0 isn't caught). Due to type promotion it
is wrong for all types (signed and unsigned) narrower than
int. Similarly, when a and b does not have the same type, there are
subtle cases like

  u32 a;

  if (a + sizeof(foo) < a)
    return -EOVERFLOW;
  a += sizeof(foo);

where the test is always false on 64 bit platforms. Add to that that it
is not always possible to determine the types involved at a glance.

The new overflow.h is somewhat bulky, but that's mostly a result of
trying to be type-generic, complete (e.g. catching not only overflow
but also signed underflow) and not relying on undefined behaviour.

Linus is of course right [1] that for unsigned subtraction a-b, the
right way to check for overflow (underflow) is "b > a" and not
"__builtin_sub_overflow(a, b, &d)", but that's just one out of six cases
covered here, and included mostly for completeness.

So is it worth it? I think it is, if nothing else for the documentation
value of seeing

  if (check_add_overflow(a, b, &d))
    return -EGOAWAY;
  do_stuff_with(d);

instead of the open-coded (and possibly wrong and/or incomplete and/or
UBsan-tickling)

  if (a+b < a)
    return -EGOAWAY;
  do_stuff_with(a+b);

While gcc does recognize the 'a+b < a' idiom for testing unsigned add
overflow, it doesn't do nearly as good for unsigned multiplication
(there's also no single well-established idiom). So using
check_mul_overflow in kcalloc and friends may also make gcc generate
slightly better code.

[1] https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/11/2/658

Signed-off-by: default avatarRasmus Villemoes <linux@rasmusvillemoes.dk>
Signed-off-by: default avatarKees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
parent 75bc37fe
......@@ -32,3 +32,17 @@
#ifdef __noretpoline
#undef __noretpoline
#endif
/*
* Not all versions of clang implement the the type-generic versions
* of the builtin overflow checkers. Fortunately, clang implements
* __has_builtin allowing us to avoid awkward version
* checks. Unfortunately, we don't know which version of gcc clang
* pretends to be, so the macro may or may not be defined.
*/
#undef COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW
#if __has_builtin(__builtin_mul_overflow) && \
__has_builtin(__builtin_add_overflow) && \
__has_builtin(__builtin_sub_overflow)
#define COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW 1
#endif
......@@ -343,3 +343,7 @@
* code
*/
#define uninitialized_var(x) x = x
#if GCC_VERSION >= 50100
#define COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW 1
#endif
......@@ -44,3 +44,7 @@
#define __builtin_bswap16 _bswap16
#endif
/*
* icc defines __GNUC__, but does not implement the builtin overflow checkers.
*/
#undef COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW
/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 OR MIT */
#ifndef __LINUX_OVERFLOW_H
#define __LINUX_OVERFLOW_H
#include <linux/compiler.h>
/*
* In the fallback code below, we need to compute the minimum and
* maximum values representable in a given type. These macros may also
* be useful elsewhere, so we provide them outside the
* COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW block.
*
* It would seem more obvious to do something like
*
* #define type_min(T) (T)(is_signed_type(T) ? (T)1 << (8*sizeof(T)-1) : 0)
* #define type_max(T) (T)(is_signed_type(T) ? ((T)1 << (8*sizeof(T)-1)) - 1 : ~(T)0)
*
* Unfortunately, the middle expressions, strictly speaking, have
* undefined behaviour, and at least some versions of gcc warn about
* the type_max expression (but not if -fsanitize=undefined is in
* effect; in that case, the warning is deferred to runtime...).
*
* The slightly excessive casting in type_min is to make sure the
* macros also produce sensible values for the exotic type _Bool. [The
* overflow checkers only almost work for _Bool, but that's
* a-feature-not-a-bug, since people shouldn't be doing arithmetic on
* _Bools. Besides, the gcc builtins don't allow _Bool* as third
* argument.]
*
* Idea stolen from
* https://mail-index.netbsd.org/tech-misc/2007/02/05/0000.html -
* credit to Christian Biere.
*/
#define is_signed_type(type) (((type)(-1)) < (type)1)
#define __type_half_max(type) ((type)1 << (8*sizeof(type) - 1 - is_signed_type(type)))
#define type_max(T) ((T)((__type_half_max(T) - 1) + __type_half_max(T)))
#define type_min(T) ((T)((T)-type_max(T)-(T)1))
#ifdef COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW
/*
* For simplicity and code hygiene, the fallback code below insists on
* a, b and *d having the same type (similar to the min() and max()
* macros), whereas gcc's type-generic overflow checkers accept
* different types. Hence we don't just make check_add_overflow an
* alias for __builtin_add_overflow, but add type checks similar to
* below.
*/
#define check_add_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
__builtin_add_overflow(__a, __b, __d); \
})
#define check_sub_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
__builtin_sub_overflow(__a, __b, __d); \
})
#define check_mul_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
__builtin_mul_overflow(__a, __b, __d); \
})
#else
/* Checking for unsigned overflow is relatively easy without causing UB. */
#define __unsigned_add_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = __a + __b; \
*__d < __a; \
})
#define __unsigned_sub_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = __a - __b; \
__a < __b; \
})
/*
* If one of a or b is a compile-time constant, this avoids a division.
*/
#define __unsigned_mul_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = __a * __b; \
__builtin_constant_p(__b) ? \
__b > 0 && __a > type_max(typeof(__a)) / __b : \
__a > 0 && __b > type_max(typeof(__b)) / __a; \
})
/*
* For signed types, detecting overflow is much harder, especially if
* we want to avoid UB. But the interface of these macros is such that
* we must provide a result in *d, and in fact we must produce the
* result promised by gcc's builtins, which is simply the possibly
* wrapped-around value. Fortunately, we can just formally do the
* operations in the widest relevant unsigned type (u64) and then
* truncate the result - gcc is smart enough to generate the same code
* with and without the (u64) casts.
*/
/*
* Adding two signed integers can overflow only if they have the same
* sign, and overflow has happened iff the result has the opposite
* sign.
*/
#define __signed_add_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = (u64)__a + (u64)__b; \
(((~(__a ^ __b)) & (*__d ^ __a)) \
& type_min(typeof(__a))) != 0; \
})
/*
* Subtraction is similar, except that overflow can now happen only
* when the signs are opposite. In this case, overflow has happened if
* the result has the opposite sign of a.
*/
#define __signed_sub_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = (u64)__a - (u64)__b; \
((((__a ^ __b)) & (*__d ^ __a)) \
& type_min(typeof(__a))) != 0; \
})
/*
* Signed multiplication is rather hard. gcc always follows C99, so
* division is truncated towards 0. This means that we can write the
* overflow check like this:
*
* (a > 0 && (b > MAX/a || b < MIN/a)) ||
* (a < -1 && (b > MIN/a || b < MAX/a) ||
* (a == -1 && b == MIN)
*
* The redundant casts of -1 are to silence an annoying -Wtype-limits
* (included in -Wextra) warning: When the type is u8 or u16, the
* __b_c_e in check_mul_overflow obviously selects
* __unsigned_mul_overflow, but unfortunately gcc still parses this
* code and warns about the limited range of __b.
*/
#define __signed_mul_overflow(a, b, d) ({ \
typeof(a) __a = (a); \
typeof(b) __b = (b); \
typeof(d) __d = (d); \
typeof(a) __tmax = type_max(typeof(a)); \
typeof(a) __tmin = type_min(typeof(a)); \
(void) (&__a == &__b); \
(void) (&__a == __d); \
*__d = (u64)__a * (u64)__b; \
(__b > 0 && (__a > __tmax/__b || __a < __tmin/__b)) || \
(__b < (typeof(__b))-1 && (__a > __tmin/__b || __a < __tmax/__b)) || \
(__b == (typeof(__b))-1 && __a == __tmin); \
})
#define check_add_overflow(a, b, d) \
__builtin_choose_expr(is_signed_type(typeof(a)), \
__signed_add_overflow(a, b, d), \
__unsigned_add_overflow(a, b, d))
#define check_sub_overflow(a, b, d) \
__builtin_choose_expr(is_signed_type(typeof(a)), \
__signed_sub_overflow(a, b, d), \
__unsigned_sub_overflow(a, b, d))
#define check_mul_overflow(a, b, d) \
__builtin_choose_expr(is_signed_type(typeof(a)), \
__signed_mul_overflow(a, b, d), \
__unsigned_mul_overflow(a, b, d))
#endif /* COMPILER_HAS_GENERIC_BUILTIN_OVERFLOW */
#endif /* __LINUX_OVERFLOW_H */
Supports Markdown
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment