From: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
To: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Marco Elver <elver@google.com>, Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>,
llvm@lists.linux.dev, Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>,
Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] compiler-gcc.h: Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ under hwaddress sanitizer
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 14:59:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YXCRPsNl2Vlgd7ct@archlinux-ax161> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211020200039.170424-1-keescook@chromium.org>
On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 01:00:39PM -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
> When Clang is using the hwaddress sanitizer, it sets __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
> explicitly:
>
> #if __has_feature(address_sanitizer) || __has_feature(hwaddress_sanitizer)
> /* Emulate GCC's __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ flag */
> #define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
> #endif
>
> Once hwaddress sanitizer was added to GCC, however, a separate define
> was created, __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__. The kernel is expecting to find
> __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in either case, though, and the existing string
> macros break on supported architectures:
>
> #if (defined(CONFIG_KASAN_GENERIC) || defined(CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS)) && \
> !defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
>
> where as other architectures (like arm32) have no idea about hwaddress
> sanitizer and just check for __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__:
>
> #if defined(CONFIG_KASAN) && !defined(__SANITIZE_ADDRESS__)
>
> This would lead to compiler foritfy self-test warnings when building
> with CONFIG_KASAN_SW_TAGS=y:
>
> warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__read_overflow2' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2-memmove.c
> warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memcpy.c
> ...
>
> Sort this out by also defining __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in GCC under the
> hwaddress sanitizer.
>
> Suggested-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> Cc: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
> Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
> Cc: Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>
> Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
> Cc: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> Cc: Arvind Sankar <nivedita@alum.mit.edu>
> Cc: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@kernel.org>
> Cc: llvm@lists.linux.dev
> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>
> ---
> I'm intending to take this via my overflow series, since that is what introduces
> the compile-test regression tests (which found this legitimate bug). :)
>
> -Kees
> ---
> include/linux/compiler-gcc.h | 8 ++++++++
> 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
> index 6f24eb8c5dda..ccbbd31b3aae 100644
> --- a/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
> +++ b/include/linux/compiler-gcc.h
> @@ -121,6 +121,14 @@
> #define __no_sanitize_coverage
> #endif
>
> +/*
> + * Treat __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__ the same as __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ in the kernel,
> + * matching the defines used by Clang.
> + */
> +#ifdef __SANITIZE_HWADDRESS__
> +#define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__
> +#endif
> +
> /*
> * Turn individual warnings and errors on and off locally, depending
> * on version.
> --
> 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-10-20 21:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-20 20:00 [PATCH] compiler-gcc.h: Define __SANITIZE_ADDRESS__ under hwaddress sanitizer Kees Cook
2021-10-20 21:59 ` Nathan Chancellor [this message]
2021-10-20 22:45 ` Miguel Ojeda
2021-10-21 8:41 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-21 6:00 ` Marco Elver
2021-10-21 8:43 ` Kees Cook
2021-10-21 8:46 ` Marco Elver
2021-10-21 13:50 ` Konstantin Ryabitsev
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=YXCRPsNl2Vlgd7ct@archlinux-ax161 \
--to=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=elver@google.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com \
--cc=masahiroy@kernel.org \
--cc=ndesaulniers@google.com \
--cc=nivedita@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).