lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Apr]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 4.4 63/72] nospec: Move array_index_nospec() parameter checking into separate macro
Date
4.4-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>

commit 8fa80c503b484ddc1abbd10c7cb2ab81f3824a50 upstream.

For architectures providing their own implementation of
array_index_mask_nospec() in asm/barrier.h, attempting to use WARN_ONCE() to
complain about out-of-range parameters using WARN_ON() results in a mess
of mutually-dependent include files.

Rather than unpick the dependencies, simply have the core code in nospec.h
perform the checking for us.

Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1517840166-15399-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: Ben Hutchings <ben.hutchings@codethink.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
include/linux/nospec.h | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

--- a/include/linux/nospec.h
+++ b/include/linux/nospec.h
@@ -21,20 +21,6 @@ static inline unsigned long array_index_
unsigned long size)
{
/*
- * Warn developers about inappropriate array_index_nospec() usage.
- *
- * Even if the CPU speculates past the WARN_ONCE branch, the
- * sign bit of @index is taken into account when generating the
- * mask.
- *
- * This warning is compiled out when the compiler can infer that
- * @index and @size are less than LONG_MAX.
- */
- if (WARN_ONCE(index > LONG_MAX || size > LONG_MAX,
- "array_index_nospec() limited to range of [0, LONG_MAX]\n"))
- return 0;
-
- /*
* Always calculate and emit the mask even if the compiler
* thinks the mask is not needed. The compiler does not take
* into account the value of @index under speculation.
@@ -45,6 +31,26 @@ static inline unsigned long array_index_
#endif

/*
+ * Warn developers about inappropriate array_index_nospec() usage.
+ *
+ * Even if the CPU speculates past the WARN_ONCE branch, the
+ * sign bit of @index is taken into account when generating the
+ * mask.
+ *
+ * This warning is compiled out when the compiler can infer that
+ * @index and @size are less than LONG_MAX.
+ */
+#define array_index_mask_nospec_check(index, size) \
+({ \
+ if (WARN_ONCE(index > LONG_MAX || size > LONG_MAX, \
+ "array_index_nospec() limited to range of [0, LONG_MAX]\n")) \
+ _mask = 0; \
+ else \
+ _mask = array_index_mask_nospec(index, size); \
+ _mask; \
+})
+
+/*
* array_index_nospec - sanitize an array index after a bounds check
*
* For a code sequence like:
@@ -62,7 +68,7 @@ static inline unsigned long array_index_
({ \
typeof(index) _i = (index); \
typeof(size) _s = (size); \
- unsigned long _mask = array_index_mask_nospec(_i, _s); \
+ unsigned long _mask = array_index_mask_nospec_check(_i, _s); \
\
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(_i) > sizeof(long)); \
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(_s) > sizeof(long)); \

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-04-06 16:57    [W:0.325 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site