lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Oct]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: -Wmacro-redefined in include/linux/fortify-string.h
On Wed, Oct 19, 2022 at 8:37 AM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I am seeing the following set of warnings when building an x86_64
> configuration that has CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=y and CONFIG_KMSAN=y:

I was also looking into this issue recently, because people start
running into it: https://github.com/google/kmsan/issues/89

I have a solution that redefines __underlying_memXXX to __msan_memXXX
under __SANITIZE_MEMORY__ in fortify-string.h and skips `#define
memXXX __msan_memXXX` in string_64.h, making KMSAN kinda work with
FORTIFY_SOURCE.
Dunno if that's necessary though: KMSAN is a debugging tool anyway,
and supporting it in fortify-string.h sounds excessive.

So I'm fine with disabling FORTIFY_STRING under KMSAN, unless someone objects.

> In file included from scripts/mod/devicetable-offsets.c:3:
> In file included from ./include/linux/mod_devicetable.h:13:
> In file included from ./include/linux/uuid.h:12:
> In file included from ./include/linux/string.h:253:
> ./include/linux/fortify-string.h:496:9: error: 'memcpy' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined]
> #define memcpy(p, q, s) __fortify_memcpy_chk(p, q, s, \
> ^
> ./arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h:17:9: note: previous definition is here
> #define memcpy __msan_memcpy
> ^
> In file included from scripts/mod/devicetable-offsets.c:3:
> In file included from ./include/linux/mod_devicetable.h:13:
> In file included from ./include/linux/uuid.h:12:
> In file included from ./include/linux/string.h:253:
> ./include/linux/fortify-string.h:500:9: error: 'memmove' macro redefined [-Werror,-Wmacro-redefined]
> #define memmove(p, q, s) __fortify_memcpy_chk(p, q, s, \
> ^
> ./arch/x86/include/asm/string_64.h:73:9: note: previous definition is here
> #define memmove __msan_memmove
> ^
> 2 errors generated.
>
> I can see that commit ff901d80fff6 ("x86: kmsan: use __msan_ string
> functions where possible.") appears to include a fix up for this warning
> with memset() but not memcpy() or memmove(). If I apply a similar fix up
> like so:
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/fortify-string.h b/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> index 4029fe368a4f..718ee17b31e3 100644
> --- a/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> +++ b/include/linux/fortify-string.h
> @@ -493,6 +493,7 @@ __FORTIFY_INLINE bool fortify_memcpy_chk(__kernel_size_t size,
> * __struct_size() vs __member_size() must be captured here to avoid
> * evaluating argument side-effects further into the macro layers.
> */
> +#ifndef CONFIG_KMSAN
> #define memcpy(p, q, s) __fortify_memcpy_chk(p, q, s, \
> __struct_size(p), __struct_size(q), \
> __member_size(p), __member_size(q), \
> @@ -501,6 +502,7 @@ __FORTIFY_INLINE bool fortify_memcpy_chk(__kernel_size_t size,
> __struct_size(p), __struct_size(q), \
> __member_size(p), __member_size(q), \
> memmove)
> +#endif
>
> extern void *__real_memscan(void *, int, __kernel_size_t) __RENAME(memscan);
> __FORTIFY_INLINE void *memscan(void * const POS0 p, int c, __kernel_size_t size)
>
> Then the instances of -Wmacro-redefined disappear but the fortify tests
> no longer pass for somewhat obvious reasons:
>
> warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__read_overflow2' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2-memcpy.c
> warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__read_overflow2' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2-memmove.c
> warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__read_overflow2_field' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2_field-memcpy.c
> warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__read_overflow2_field' symbol in lib/test_fortify/read_overflow2_field-memmove.c
> warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memcpy.c
> warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memmove.c
> warning: unsafe memset() usage lacked '__write_overflow' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow-memset.c
> warning: unsafe memcpy() usage lacked '__write_overflow_field' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow_field-memcpy.c
> warning: unsafe memmove() usage lacked '__write_overflow_field' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow_field-memmove.c
> warning: unsafe memset() usage lacked '__write_overflow_field' symbol in lib/test_fortify/write_overflow_field-memset.c
>
> Should CONFIG_KMSAN depend on CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE=n like so? It seems
> like the two features are incompatible if I am reading ff901d80fff6
> correctly.
>
> diff --git a/lib/Kconfig.kmsan b/lib/Kconfig.kmsan
> index b2489dd6503f..6a681621e3c5 100644
> --- a/lib/Kconfig.kmsan
> +++ b/lib/Kconfig.kmsan
> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ config HAVE_KMSAN_COMPILER
> config KMSAN
> bool "KMSAN: detector of uninitialized values use"
> depends on HAVE_ARCH_KMSAN && HAVE_KMSAN_COMPILER
> - depends on SLUB && DEBUG_KERNEL && !KASAN && !KCSAN
> + depends on SLUB && DEBUG_KERNEL && !KASAN && !KCSAN && !FORTIFY_SOURCE
> select STACKDEPOT
> select STACKDEPOT_ALWAYS_INIT
> help
>
> or is there a different obvious fix that I am missing?
>
> Cheers,
> Nathan



--
Alexander Potapenko
Software Engineer

Google Germany GmbH
Erika-Mann-Straße, 33
80636 München

Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Liana Sebastian
Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Hamburg

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-10-19 18:50    [W:0.125 / U:0.008 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site