Re: [PATCH v7 2/6] syscall.h: add syscall_set_arguments()

From: Dmitry V. Levin
Date: Wed Apr 09 2025 - 02:40:56 EST


On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 05:38:03PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2025 at 01:36:11AM +0300, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 02:31:31PM -0700, Nathan Chancellor wrote:
> > > On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 01:20:09PM +0200, Dmitry V. Levin wrote:
> > > > +static inline void syscall_set_arguments(struct task_struct *task,
> > > > + struct pt_regs *regs,
> > > > + const unsigned long *args)
> > > > +{
> > > > + regs->orig_a0 = args[0];
> > > > + args++;
> > > > + memcpy(&regs->a1, args, 5 * sizeof(regs->a1));
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > This upsets the compiletime fortify checks, as I see a warning after
> > > syscall_set_arguments() starts being used in kernel/ptrace.c later in
> > > the series.
> > >
> > > $ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=riscv CROSS_COMPILE=riscv64-linux- allmodconfig kernel/ptrace.o
> > > In file included from include/linux/string.h:392,
> > > from include/linux/bitmap.h:13,
> > > from include/linux/cpumask.h:12,
> > > from arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h:55,
> > > from include/linux/sched.h:13,
> > > from kernel/ptrace.c:13:
> > > In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk',
> > > inlined from 'syscall_set_arguments.isra' at arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h:82:2:
> > > include/linux/fortify-string.h:571:25: error: call to '__write_overflow_field' declared with attribute warning: detected write beyond size of field (1st parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror=attribute-warning]
> > > 571 | __write_overflow_field(p_size_field, size);
> > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > > cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
> >
> > I certainly tested the series on riscv64, but somehow I haven't seen this
> > compiler diagnostics before.
>
> Maybe CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE was not enabled? This comes from the
> kernel's fortified memcpy checking function, fortify_memcpy_chk(), not
> necessarily the compiler itself.
>
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> > > index a5281cdf2b10..70ec19dc8506 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> > > @@ -78,8 +78,11 @@ static inline void syscall_set_arguments(struct task_struct *task,
> > > const unsigned long *args)
> > > {
> > > regs->orig_a0 = args[0];
> > > - args++;
> > > - memcpy(&regs->a1, args, 5 * sizeof(regs->a1));
> > > + regs->a1 = args[1];
> > > + regs->a2 = args[2];
> > > + regs->a3 = args[3];
> > > + regs->a4 = args[4];
> > > + regs->a5 = args[5];
> > > }
> >
> > I don't mind eliminating the memcpy() altogether, but
> > I'd like to note that syscall_set_arguments() is an exact mirror
> > of syscall_get_arguments(), so if the intentional overwrite in
> > syscall_set_arguments() is not acceptable, then the intentional
> > overread in syscall_get_arguments() shouldn't be acceptable either.
>
> Yes, I noticed the symmetry too but I was only looking at it from the
> overwrite perspective, not the overread one. That reminded me to double
> check what fortify_memcpy_chk() actually checks for and I remembered
> that the overread version of this warning is hidden under W=1 (I guess
> because it happens more frequently).
>
> $ make -skj"$(nproc)" ARCH=riscv CROSS_COMPILE=riscv64-linux- W=1 allmodconfig kernel/ptrace.o
> In file included from include/linux/string.h:392,
> from include/linux/bitmap.h:13,
> from include/linux/cpumask.h:12,
> from arch/riscv/include/asm/processor.h:55,
> from include/linux/sched.h:13,
> from kernel/ptrace.c:13:
> In function 'fortify_memcpy_chk',
> inlined from 'syscall_get_arguments.isra' at arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h:73:2:
> include/linux/fortify-string.h:580:25: error: call to '__read_overflow2_field' declared with attribute warning: detected read beyond size of field (2nd parameter); maybe use struct_group()? [-Werror=attribute-warning]
> 580 | __read_overflow2_field(q_size_field, size);
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
>
> So memcpy() should indeed be eliminated from both, which obviously
> clears up the warnings.
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> index a5281cdf2b10..34313387f977 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/syscall.h
> @@ -69,8 +69,11 @@ static inline void syscall_get_arguments(struct task_struct *task,
> unsigned long *args)
> {
> args[0] = regs->orig_a0;
> - args++;
> - memcpy(args, &regs->a1, 5 * sizeof(args[0]));
> + args[1] = regs->a1;
> + args[2] = regs->a2;
> + args[3] = regs->a3;
> + args[4] = regs->a4;
> + args[5] = regs->a5;
> }
>
> static inline void syscall_set_arguments(struct task_struct *task,
> @@ -78,8 +81,11 @@ static inline void syscall_set_arguments(struct task_struct *task,
> const unsigned long *args)
> {
> regs->orig_a0 = args[0];
> - args++;
> - memcpy(&regs->a1, args, 5 * sizeof(regs->a1));
> + regs->a1 = args[1];
> + regs->a2 = args[2];
> + regs->a3 = args[3];
> + regs->a4 = args[4];
> + regs->a5 = args[5];
> }
>
> static inline int syscall_get_arch(struct task_struct *task)

Looks good, thanks. How do we proceed from this point?


--
ldv