From: Sourabh Jain <sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com>
To: Thorsten Blum <blum@kernel.org>
Cc: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>,
Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
"Christophe Leroy (CS GROUP)" <chleroy@kernel.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@kernel.org>,
"Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
Aditya Gupta <adityag@linux.ibm.com>,
Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc/kexec: Annotate umem_info members with __counted_by_ptr
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2026 13:42:01 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dbb4580d-7e20-4c38-9716-f39cf81a4942@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <asDClaRrHuKB44X-@kernel.org>
On 03/10/26 14:23, Thorsten Blum wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 25, 2026 at 11:49:04AM +0530, Sourabh Jain wrote:
>> On 30/07/26 18:32, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>>> Add __counted_by_ptr() to umem_info::buf and umem_info::ranges to
>>> improve access bounds checking via CONFIG_UBSAN_BOUNDS and
>>> CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE.
>>>
>>> Set the count fields before assigning the corresponding pointers, return
>>> early on krealloc() failure, and use sizeof(*buf) when deriving
>>> max_entries from the allocation size.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>
>>> ---
>>> arch/powerpc/kexec/file_load_64.c | 22 ++++++++++++----------
>>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kexec/file_load_64.c b/arch/powerpc/kexec/file_load_64.c
>>> index 8c72e12ea44e..6424b668f0e9 100644
>>> --- a/arch/powerpc/kexec/file_load_64.c
>>> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kexec/file_load_64.c
>>> @@ -34,14 +34,15 @@
>>> #include <asm/cputhreads.h>
>>> struct umem_info {
>>> - __be64 *buf; /* data buffer for usable-memory property */
>>> + /* data buffer for usable-memory property */
>>> + __be64 *buf __counted_by_ptr(max_entries);
>>> u32 size; /* size allocated for the data buffer */
>>> u32 max_entries; /* maximum no. of entries */
>>> u32 idx; /* index of current entry */
>>> /* usable memory ranges to look up */
>>> unsigned int nr_ranges;
>>> - const struct range *ranges;
>>> + const struct range *ranges __counted_by_ptr(nr_ranges);
>>> };
>> [...]
>>> const struct kexec_file_ops * const kexec_file_loaders[] = {
>>> @@ -83,11 +84,12 @@ static __be64 *check_realloc_usable_mem(struct umem_info *um_info, int cnt)
>>> new_size = um_info->size + MEM_RANGE_CHUNK_SZ;
>>> tbuf = krealloc(um_info->buf, new_size, GFP_KERNEL);
>>> - if (tbuf) {
>>> - um_info->buf = tbuf;
>>> - um_info->size = new_size;
>>> - um_info->max_entries = (um_info->size / sizeof(u64));
>>> - }
>>> + if (!tbuf)
>>> + return NULL;
>>> +
>>> + um_info->size = new_size;
>>> + um_info->max_entries = um_info->size / sizeof(*um_info->buf);
>>> + um_info->buf = tbuf;
>>
>> Could you please explain why size and max_entries are updated before the
>> buffer itself?
> __counted_by_ptr() requires the counter ->max_entries to be set before
> the ->buf pointer is assigned; otherwise you have an inconsistent state
> where the counter doesn't match the pointer.
But isn't updating the counter holding the buffer size before the actual
buffer
can cause problems?
Can you share the document link of __counted_by_ptr() which says that
size counter to be
updated before the buffer pointer.
Here is an example in fs/coredump.c file where size counter is updated
after the buffer
with __counter_by_ptr():
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/a90ee4305c4a5df72c11b31dacfdc76e00fcf78a/fs/coredump.c#L98
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/a90ee4305c4a5df72c11b31dacfdc76e00fcf78a/fs/coredump.c#L115
- Sourabh Jain
> And ->size is moved up because ->max_entries depends on it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-05 8:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-30 13:02 Thorsten Blum
2026-09-25 6:19 ` Sourabh Jain
2026-10-03 8:53 ` Thorsten Blum
2026-10-05 8:12 ` Sourabh Jain [this message]
2026-10-05 8:26 ` Thorsten Blum
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=dbb4580d-7e20-4c38-9716-f39cf81a4942@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sourabhjain@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=adityag@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=blum@kernel.org \
--cc=chleroy@kernel.org \
--cc=gustavoars@kernel.org \
--cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kees@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=thorsten.blum@linux.dev \
/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®