[PATCH 40/82] arm64: stacktrace: Refactor intentional wrap-around test

From: Kees Cook
Date: Mon Jan 22 2024 - 20:28:14 EST


In an effort to separate intentional arithmetic wrap-around from
unexpected wrap-around, we need to refactor places that depend on this
kind of math. One of the most common code patterns of this is:

VAR + value < VAR

Notably, this is considered "undefined behavior" for signed and pointer
types, which the kernel works around by using the -fno-strict-overflow
option in the build[1] (which used to just be -fwrapv). Regardless, we
want to get the kernel source to the position where we can meaningfully
instrument arithmetic wrap-around conditions and catch them when they
are unexpected, regardless of whether they are signed[2], unsigned[3],
or pointer[4] types.

Refactor open-coded wrap-around addition test to use add_would_overflow().
This paves the way to enabling the wrap-around sanitizers in the future.

Link: https://git.kernel.org/linus/68df3755e383e6fecf2354a67b08f92f18536594 [1]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/26 [2]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/27 [3]
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/344 [4]
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Kalesh Singh <kaleshsingh@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Fuad Tabba <tabba@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "Madhavan T. Venkataraman" <madvenka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
index f63dc654e545..6e0cb84961f8 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/stacktrace/common.h
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ static inline bool stackinfo_on_stack(const struct stack_info *info,
if (!info->low)
return false;

- if (sp < info->low || sp + size < sp || sp + size > info->high)
+ if (sp < info->low || add_would_overflow(sp, size) || sp + size > info->high)
return false;

return true;
--
2.34.1