Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756146AbbLDLdh (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 06:33:37 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f44.google.com ([74.125.82.44]:37393 "EHLO mail-wm0-f44.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751481AbbLDLdf (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Dec 2015 06:33:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <566179D1.2050107@gmail.com> References: <566179D1.2050107@gmail.com> From: Dmitry Vyukov Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 12:33:14 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: time: signed integer overflow in ktime_add_safe To: Andrey Ryabinin Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa , Thomas Gleixner , LKML , syzkaller , Kostya Serebryany , Alexander Potapenko , Sasha Levin , Eric Dumazet , Linus Torvalds Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 3583 Lines: 94 On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Andrey Ryabinin wrote: > On 12/04/2015 02:05 PM, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: >> Hello, >> >> UBSAN reports undefined behavior in ktime_add_safe: >> >> UBSAN: Undefined behaviour in kernel/time/hrtimer.c:310:16 >> signed integer overflow: >> 9223372036854775807 + 100000000 cannot be represented in type 'long long int' >> CPU: 3 PID: 26438 Comm: syzkaller_execu Tainted: G B >> 4.4.0-rc3+ #141 >> Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS Bochs 01/01/2011 >> 0000000000000003 ffff88005a62f518 ffffffff82c65588 0000000041b58ab3 >> ffffffff8769c1b6 ffffffff82c654d6 ffff88005a62f4e0 ffff88005a62f618 >> 0000000005f5e100 0000000000000001 ffff88005a62f520 ffffffff82d540c7 >> Call Trace: >> [] __ubsan_handle_add_overflow+0x2a/0x31 lib/ubsan.c:199 >> [< inline >] ktime_add_safe kernel/time/hrtimer.c:310 >> [< inline >] hrtimer_set_expires_range_ns include/linux/hrtimer.h:224 >> [] schedule_hrtimeout_range_clock+0x4ae/0x580 >> kernel/time/hrtimer.c:1731 >> [] schedule_hrtimeout_range+0x2a/0x40 >> kernel/time/hrtimer.c:1779 >> [] poll_schedule_timeout+0xd2/0x180 fs/select.c:241 >> [< inline >] do_poll fs/select.c:861 >> [] do_sys_poll+0xa4b/0xfc0 fs/select.c:911 >> [< inline >] SYSC_ppoll fs/select.c:1019 >> [] SyS_ppoll+0x1a9/0x420 fs/select.c:991 >> >> On commit 31ade3b83e1821da5fbb2f11b5b3d4ab2ec39db8. >> >> For: >> >> ktime_t ktime_add_safe(const ktime_t lhs, const ktime_t rhs) >> { >> ktime_t res = ktime_add(lhs, rhs); >> if (res.tv64 < 0 || res.tv64 < lhs.tv64 || res.tv64 < rhs.tv64) >> res = ktime_set(KTIME_SEC_MAX, 0); >> return res; >> } >> > > I think we can workaround it this way: > > diff --git a/include/linux/ktime.h b/include/linux/ktime.h > index 2b6a204..c768cc0 100644 > --- a/include/linux/ktime.h > +++ b/include/linux/ktime.h > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static inline ktime_t ktime_set(const s64 secs, const unsigned long nsecs) > > /* Add two ktime_t variables. res = lhs + rhs: */ > #define ktime_add(lhs, rhs) \ > - ({ (ktime_t){ .tv64 = (lhs).tv64 + (rhs).tv64 }; }) > + ({ (ktime_t){ .tv64 = (s64)((u64)(lhs).tv64 + (u64)(rhs).tv64) }; }) > > /* > * Add a ktime_t variable and a scalar nanosecond value. > >> compiler is within its rights to assume that res.tv64 < rhs.tv64 is >> always false (after inlining ktime_add). And compilers already do >> this. > > Not with -fno-strict-overflow Then I guess we need to disable this check in kernel ubsan. >> For example, if you compile the following program with clang -O2 >> (clang version 3.8.0 (trunk 252895)), it does not print OVERFLOW: >> >> #include >> #include >> int main() { >> volatile int x = 0; >> int a = INT_MAX + x; >> int b = 1 + x; >> if (a + b < a) >> printf("OVERFLOW\n"); >> return 0; >> } >> >> Proper overflow checking for signed integers is quite hairy and easy >> to mess up. Do we have any helper functions for this? I've seen some >> patches from Hannes, not sure what's their status. >> > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/2072906/focus=2073073 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/