[4/5] overflow: Introduce add_wrap(), sub_wrap(), and mul_wrap()
Commit Message
Provide helpers that will perform wrapping addition, subtraction, or
multiplication without tripping the arithmetic wrap-around sanitizers. The
first argument is the type under which the wrap-around should happen
with. In other words, these two calls will get very different results:
add_wrap(int, 50, 50) == 2500
add_wrap(u8, 50, 50) == 196
Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
---
include/linux/overflow.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
Comments
On 29/01/2024 19.34, Kees Cook wrote:
> Provide helpers that will perform wrapping addition, subtraction, or
> multiplication without tripping the arithmetic wrap-around sanitizers. The
> first argument is the type under which the wrap-around should happen
> with. In other words, these two calls will get very different results:
>
> add_wrap(int, 50, 50) == 2500
> add_wrap(u8, 50, 50) == 196
s/add/mul/g I suppose.
> Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> ---
> include/linux/overflow.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/overflow.h b/include/linux/overflow.h
> index 3c46c648d2e8..4f945e9e7881 100644
> --- a/include/linux/overflow.h
> +++ b/include/linux/overflow.h
> @@ -120,6 +120,24 @@ static inline bool __must_check __must_check_overflow(bool overflow)
> check_add_overflow(var, offset, &__result); \
> }))
>
> +/**
> + * add_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping addition
> + * @type: type to check overflow against
Well, nothing is "checked", so why not just say "type of result"?
>
> +/**
> + * sub_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping subtraction
> + * @type: type to check underflow against
The terminology becomes muddy, is (INT_MAX) - (-1) an underflow or
overflow? Anyway, see above.
>
> +/**
> + * mul_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping multiplication
> + * @type: type to check underflow against
And here there's definitely a copy-pasto.
The code itself looks fine.
Rasmus
On Mon, Jan 29, 2024 at 09:08:43PM +0100, Rasmus Villemoes wrote:
> On 29/01/2024 19.34, Kees Cook wrote:
> > Provide helpers that will perform wrapping addition, subtraction, or
> > multiplication without tripping the arithmetic wrap-around sanitizers. The
> > first argument is the type under which the wrap-around should happen
> > with. In other words, these two calls will get very different results:
> >
> > add_wrap(int, 50, 50) == 2500
> > add_wrap(u8, 50, 50) == 196
>
> s/add/mul/g I suppose.
Oops, yes.
> > Cc: Rasmus Villemoes <rasmus.villemoes@prevas.dk>
> > Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> > Cc: linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
> > ---
> > include/linux/overflow.h | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 54 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/overflow.h b/include/linux/overflow.h
> > index 3c46c648d2e8..4f945e9e7881 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/overflow.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/overflow.h
> > @@ -120,6 +120,24 @@ static inline bool __must_check __must_check_overflow(bool overflow)
> > check_add_overflow(var, offset, &__result); \
> > }))
> >
> > +/**
> > + * add_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping addition
> > + * @type: type to check overflow against
>
> Well, nothing is "checked", so why not just say "type of result"?
Yeah, that's better. I was trying to describe that @type will affect the
value of the result.
> > +/**
> > + * sub_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping subtraction
> > + * @type: type to check underflow against
>
> The terminology becomes muddy, is (INT_MAX) - (-1) an underflow or
> overflow? Anyway, see above.
Right, I should explicitly say "wrap-around".
>
> >
> > +/**
> > + * mul_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping multiplication
> > + * @type: type to check underflow against
>
> And here there's definitely a copy-pasto.
Ek, yes.
> The code itself looks fine.
Thanks!
@@ -120,6 +120,24 @@ static inline bool __must_check __must_check_overflow(bool overflow)
check_add_overflow(var, offset, &__result); \
}))
+/**
+ * add_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping addition
+ * @type: type to check overflow against
+ * @a: first addend
+ * @b: second addend
+ *
+ * Return the potentially wrapped-around addition without
+ * tripping any overflow sanitizers that may be enabled.
+ */
+#define add_wrap(type, a, b) \
+ ({ \
+ type __sum; \
+ if (check_add_overflow(a, b, &__sum)) { \
+ /* do nothing */ \
+ } \
+ __sum; \
+ })
+
/**
* check_sub_overflow() - Calculate subtraction with overflow checking
* @a: minuend; value to subtract from
@@ -133,6 +151,24 @@ static inline bool __must_check __must_check_overflow(bool overflow)
#define check_sub_overflow(a, b, d) \
__must_check_overflow(__builtin_sub_overflow(a, b, d))
+/**
+ * sub_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping subtraction
+ * @type: type to check underflow against
+ * @a: minuend; value to subtract from
+ * @b: subtrahend; value to subtract from @a
+ *
+ * Return the potentially wrapped-around subtraction without
+ * tripping any overflow sanitizers that may be enabled.
+ */
+#define sub_wrap(type, a, b) \
+ ({ \
+ type __val; \
+ if (check_sub_overflow(a, b, &__val)) { \
+ /* do nothing */ \
+ } \
+ __val; \
+ })
+
/**
* check_mul_overflow() - Calculate multiplication with overflow checking
* @a: first factor
@@ -146,6 +182,24 @@ static inline bool __must_check __must_check_overflow(bool overflow)
#define check_mul_overflow(a, b, d) \
__must_check_overflow(__builtin_mul_overflow(a, b, d))
+/**
+ * mul_wrap() - Intentionally perform a wrapping multiplication
+ * @type: type to check underflow against
+ * @a: first factor
+ * @b: second factor
+ *
+ * Return the potentially wrapped-around multiplication without
+ * tripping any overflow sanitizers that may be enabled.
+ */
+#define mul_wrap(type, a, b) \
+ ({ \
+ type __val; \
+ if (check_mul_overflow(a, b, &__val)) { \
+ /* do nothing */ \
+ } \
+ __val; \
+ })
+
/**
* check_shl_overflow() - Calculate a left-shifted value and check overflow
* @a: Value to be shifted