Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 Jan 2019 17:53:19 -0800 | From | Dmitry Torokhov <> | Subject | Re: UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in drivers/pps/pps.c |
| |
On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 10:20:50AM +0100, Rodolfo Giometti wrote: > On 08/01/2019 21:24, Kyungtae Kim wrote: > > We report a bug in linux-4.20: "UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in drivers/pps/pps.c" > > > > kernel config: https://kt0755.github.io/etc/config_v4.20_stable > > repro: https://kt0755.github.io/etc/repro.a6372.c > > > > pps_cdev_pps_fetch() lacks the bounds checking for computing > > fdata->timeout.sec * HZ, that causes such integer overflow when the result > > is larger than the boundary. > > The patch below checks the possibility of overflow right before the > > multiplication. > > > > ========================================= > > UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in drivers/pps/pps.c:82:30 > > signed integer overflow: > > -7557201428062104791 * 100 cannot be represented in type 'long long int' > > CPU: 0 PID: 10159 Comm: syz-executor6 Not tainted 4.20.0 #1 > > Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 > > Call Trace: > > __dump_stack lib/dump_stack.c:77 [inline] > > dump_stack+0xb1/0x118 lib/dump_stack.c:113 > > ubsan_epilogue+0x12/0x94 lib/ubsan.c:159 > > handle_overflow+0x1cf/0x21a lib/ubsan.c:190 > > __ubsan_handle_mul_overflow+0x2a/0x35 lib/ubsan.c:214 > > pps_cdev_pps_fetch+0x575/0x5b0 drivers/pps/pps.c:82 > > pps_cdev_ioctl+0x567/0x910 drivers/pps/pps.c:191 > > vfs_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:46 [inline] > > do_vfs_ioctl+0x1aa/0x1160 fs/ioctl.c:698 > > ksys_ioctl+0x9e/0xb0 fs/ioctl.c:713 > > __do_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:720 [inline] > > __se_sys_ioctl fs/ioctl.c:718 [inline] > > __x64_sys_ioctl+0x7e/0xc0 fs/ioctl.c:718 > > do_syscall_64+0xbe/0x4f0 arch/x86/entry/common.c:290 > > entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x49/0xbe > > RIP: 0033:0x4497b9 > > Code: e8 8c 9f 02 00 48 83 c4 18 c3 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 48 89 f8 48 > > 89 f7 48 89 d6 48 89 ca 4d 89 c2 4d 89 c8 4c 8b 4c 24 08 0f 05 <48> 3d > > 01 f0 ff ff 0f 83 9b 6b fc ff c3 66 2e 0f 1f 84 00 00 00 00 > > RSP: 002b:00007f8cf875bc68 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX: 0000000000000010 > > RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 00007f8cf875c6cc RCX: 00000000004497b9 > > RDX: 0000000020000240 RSI: 00000000c00870a4 RDI: 0000000000000014 > > RBP: 000000000071bea0 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 0000000000000000 > > R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 00000000ffffffff > > R13: 0000000000005c10 R14: 00000000006eecb0 R15: 00007f8cf875c700 > > ========================================= > > > > --- > > drivers/pps/pps.c | 2 ++ > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/pps/pps.c b/drivers/pps/pps.c > > index 8febacb..66002e1 100644 > > --- a/drivers/pps/pps.c > > +++ b/drivers/pps/pps.c > > @@ -79,6 +79,8 @@ static int pps_cdev_pps_fetch(struct pps_device > > *pps, struct pps_fdata *fdata) > > dev_dbg(pps->dev, "timeout %lld.%09d\n", > > (long long) fdata->timeout.sec, > > fdata->timeout.nsec); > > + if (fdata->timeout.sec > S64_MAX / HZ) > > + return -EINVAL; > > ticks = fdata->timeout.sec * HZ; > > ticks += fdata->timeout.nsec / (NSEC_PER_SEC / HZ); > > It looks good to me. Do you think is better adding a check for timeout.nsec also?
Another option is to use check_mul_overflow().
> > Now you have to produce a patch according to > linux/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst and then submitting it! > :-) >
Thanks.
-- Dmitry
| |