From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Samuel Moelius <sam.moelius@trailofbits.com>
Cc: David Hildenbrand <david@kernel.org>,
Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@ziepe.ca>,
John Hubbard <jhubbard@nvidia.com>, Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>,
linux-mm@kvack.org (open list:MEMORY MANAGEMENT - GUP (GET USER
PAGES)), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org (open list)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mm/gup_test: reject wrapped user ranges
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2026 18:27:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260609182705.7b3a46e7c4661bd55f8561eb@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260609004814.1240586.6294d614ac80.gup-test-range-end-wrap@trailofbits.com>
On Tue, 9 Jun 2026 00:48:15 +0000 Samuel Moelius <sam.moelius@trailofbits.com> wrote:
> gup_test accepts an address and size from the debugfs ioctl and
> repeatedly compares against addr + size. If that addition wraps, the
> loop can be skipped and the ioctl returns success with size rewritten to
> zero.
>
> Compute the end address once with overflow checking and use that checked
> end for the loop bounds.
>
Looks sane, thanks.
> --- a/mm/gup_test.c
> +++ b/mm/gup_test.c
> @@ -105,11 +105,15 @@ static int __gup_test_ioctl(unsigned int cmd,
> unsigned long i, nr_pages, addr, next;
> long nr;
> struct page **pages;
> + unsigned long end;
> int ret = 0;
> bool needs_mmap_lock =
> cmd != GUP_FAST_BENCHMARK && cmd != PIN_FAST_BENCHMARK;
>
> - if (gup->size > ULONG_MAX)
> + if (gup->addr > ULONG_MAX || gup->size > ULONG_MAX)
> + return -EINVAL;
> + if (check_add_overflow((unsigned long)gup->addr,
> + (unsigned long)gup->size, &end))
I wonder why those fields were made __u64 instead of ulong.
> return -EINVAL;
>
> nr_pages = gup->size / PAGE_SIZE;
> @@ -125,13 +129,13 @@ static int __gup_test_ioctl(unsigned int cmd,
> i = 0;
> nr = gup->nr_pages_per_call;
> start_time = ktime_get();
> - for (addr = gup->addr; addr < gup->addr + gup->size; addr = next) {
> + for (addr = gup->addr; addr < end; addr = next) {
> if (nr != gup->nr_pages_per_call)
> break;
>
> next = addr + nr * PAGE_SIZE;
Sashiko AI review identified a pre-existing possible overflow here on
32-bit machines.
https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260609004814.1240586.6294d614ac80.gup-test-range-end-wrap@trailofbits.com
> - if (next > gup->addr + gup->size) {
> - next = gup->addr + gup->size;
> + if (next > end) {
> + next = end;
> nr = (next - addr) / PAGE_SIZE;
> }
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-10 1:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-09 0:48 Samuel Moelius
2026-06-10 1:27 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2026-06-10 12:21 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
2026-06-10 17:22 ` Samuel Moelius
2026-06-10 20:33 ` Andrew Morton
2026-06-10 12:18 ` David Hildenbrand (Arm)
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=20260609182705.7b3a46e7c4661bd55f8561eb@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=david@kernel.org \
--cc=jgg@ziepe.ca \
--cc=jhubbard@nvidia.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=peterx@redhat.com \
--cc=sam.moelius@trailofbits.com \
/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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®