This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH][gdb] fix unsigned overflow in charset.c
On 10/09/2018 08:58 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> On 10/9/18 11:10 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 1:57 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 10/9/18 10:40 AM, Paul Koning wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> On Oct 9, 2018, at 1:31 PM, Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>> I also ran into the same failure using LLVM's ubsan on FreeBSD but in a different
>>> use of obstack_blank_fast(). If we wanted to fix this, I wonder if we'd instead
>>> want to fix it centrally in obstack_blank_fast (e.g. by using a ptrdiff_t cast)
>>> rather than fixing various consumers of the API. That would be a change to
>>> libiberty though, not just gdb.
>>
>> I suppose. But casts in macros scare me, they can hide mistakes. It seems more reasonable to have the caller be responsible for creating a value of the correct type. Since it's an adjustment, I suppose the cast should be for ptrdiff_t rather than ssize_t?
>
> So if obstack_blank_fast() were an inline function instead of a macro, I
> suspect it's second argument would be of type ptrdiff_t in which case the
> equivalent "hidden" cast would happen at the function call. That said,
> the obstack_blank() macro uses _OBSTACK_SIZE_T (which is an unsigned size_t)
> when it declares a local variable to pass as the offset, so it seems obstack
> really is relying on unsigned wrap around.
The function is documented to take an int, at least:
void obstack_blank_fast (struct obstack *obstack-ptr, int size)
https://www.gnu.org/software/libc/manual/html_node/Summary-of-Obstacks.html
Looks like some of the "int"-ness was lost with the obstack v2 changes
a while ago, to support larger (64-bit) objects.
If I diff my system's obstack.h with libiberty's local copy, I see:
(This is Fedora 27, a little outdated wrt to glibc in use by now.
Upstream glibc's obstack.h is in sync with liberty's IIRC.)
$ diff -upw /usr/include/obstack.h obstack.h | less
-#ifdef __PTRDIFF_TYPE__
-# define PTR_INT_TYPE __PTRDIFF_TYPE__
+#if _OBSTACK_INTERFACE_VERSION == 1
+/* For binary compatibility with obstack version 1, which used "int"
+ and "long" for these two types. */
+# define _OBSTACK_SIZE_T unsigned int
+# define _CHUNK_SIZE_T unsigned long
+# define _OBSTACK_CAST(type, expr) ((type) (expr))
#else
-# include <stddef.h>
-# define PTR_INT_TYPE ptrdiff_t
+/* Version 2 with sane types, especially for 64-bit hosts. */
+# define _OBSTACK_SIZE_T size_t
+# define _CHUNK_SIZE_T size_t
+# define _OBSTACK_CAST(type, expr) (expr)
#endif
and
@@ -359,11 +375,10 @@ extern int obstack_exit_failure;
# define obstack_blank(OBSTACK, length) \
__extension__ \
({ struct obstack *__o = (OBSTACK); \
- int __len = (length); \
- if (__o->chunk_limit - __o->next_free < __len) \
+ _OBSTACK_SIZE_T __len = (length); \
+ if (obstack_room (__o) < __len) \
_obstack_newchunk (__o, __len); \
- obstack_blank_fast (__o, __len); \
- (void) 0; })
+ obstack_blank_fast (__o, __len); })
Note how above we used to have "int __len = (length);"
But that's obstack_blank, not obstack_blank_fast. The latter
never had a cast.
Not sure what's best to do, but I think I leaning toward
agreeing with Paul, in that passing down a signed negative
integer rather than passing down a large unsigned integer
expecting it to cast to a negative integer ends up
being a little better.
Thanks,
Pedro Alves