lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Aug]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 1/5] list: Split list_add() debug checking into separate function
Date
Right now, __list_add() code is repeated either in list.h or in
list_debug.c, but only the debug checks are the different part. This
extracts the checking into a separate function and consolidates
__list_add(). Additionally this __list_add_debug() will stop list
manipulations if a corruption is detected, instead of allowing for further
corruption that may lead to even worse conditions.

This is slight refactoring of the same hardening done in PaX and Grsecurity.

Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
include/linux/list.h | 22 ++++++++++++++++------
lib/list_debug.c | 35 ++++++++++++++++++-----------------
2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/list.h b/include/linux/list.h
index 5183138aa932..c38ff652ab59 100644
--- a/include/linux/list.h
+++ b/include/linux/list.h
@@ -28,27 +28,37 @@ static inline void INIT_LIST_HEAD(struct list_head *list)
list->prev = list;
}

+#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST
+extern bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
+ struct list_head *prev,
+ struct list_head *next);
+#else
+static inline bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
+ struct list_head *prev,
+ struct list_head *next)
+{
+ return true;
+}
+#endif
+
/*
* Insert a new entry between two known consecutive entries.
*
* This is only for internal list manipulation where we know
* the prev/next entries already!
*/
-#ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_LIST
static inline void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
struct list_head *prev,
struct list_head *next)
{
+ if (!__list_add_debug(new, prev, next))
+ return;
+
next->prev = new;
new->next = next;
new->prev = prev;
WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new);
}
-#else
-extern void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
- struct list_head *prev,
- struct list_head *next);
-#endif

/**
* list_add - add a new entry
diff --git a/lib/list_debug.c b/lib/list_debug.c
index 3859bf63561c..5d78982eeb99 100644
--- a/lib/list_debug.c
+++ b/lib/list_debug.c
@@ -19,27 +19,28 @@
* the prev/next entries already!
*/

-void __list_add(struct list_head *new,
+bool __list_add_debug(struct list_head *new,
struct list_head *prev,
struct list_head *next)
{
- WARN(next->prev != prev,
- "list_add corruption. next->prev should be "
- "prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
- prev, next->prev, next);
- WARN(prev->next != next,
- "list_add corruption. prev->next should be "
- "next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
- next, prev->next, prev);
- WARN(new == prev || new == next,
- "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
- new, prev, next);
- next->prev = new;
- new->next = next;
- new->prev = prev;
- WRITE_ONCE(prev->next, new);
+ if (unlikely(next->prev != prev)) {
+ WARN(1, "list_add corruption. next->prev should be prev (%p), but was %p. (next=%p).\n",
+ prev, next->prev, next);
+ return false;
+ }
+ if (unlikely(prev->next != next)) {
+ WARN(1, "list_add corruption. prev->next should be next (%p), but was %p. (prev=%p).\n",
+ next, prev->next, prev);
+ return false;
+ }
+ if (unlikely(new == prev || new == next)) {
+ WARN(1, "list_add double add: new=%p, prev=%p, next=%p.\n",
+ new, prev, next);
+ return false;
+ }
+ return true;
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add);
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(__list_add_debug);

void __list_del_entry(struct list_head *entry)
{
--
2.7.4
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-09-17 09:57    [W:0.076 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site