| Message ID | 20221214032528.2859009-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v2] x86: Prevent SIGSEGV in memcmp-sse2 when data is concurrently modified [BZ #29863] | expand |
OK, last wordsmith pass, I promise. Please post a v3 and I'll ACK that. On 12/13/22 22:25, Noah Goldstein via Libc-alpha wrote: > In the case of INCORRECT usage of `memcmp(a, b, N)` where `a` and `b` > are concurrently modified as `memcmp` runs, there can be a SIGSEGV > in `L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0)` because the sequential logic > assumes that `(rdx - 32 + rax)` is a positive 32-bit integer. > > To be clear, this "fix" does not mean this usage of `memcmp` is > supported. `memcmp` is incorrect when the values of `a` and/or `b` > are modified while its running, and that incorrectness may manifest > itself as a SIGSEGV. That being said, if we can make the results > less dramatic with no cost to regular use cases, there is no harm > in doing so. Suggest: To be clear, this change does not mean the usage of `memcmp` is supported. The program behaviour is undefined (UB) in the presence of data races, and `memcmp` is incorrect when the values of `a` and/or `b` are modified concurrently (data race). This UB may manifest itself as a SIGSEGV. That being said, if we can allow the idiomatic use cases, like those in yottadb with opportunistic concurrency control (OCC), to execute without a SIGSEGV, at no cost to regular use cases, then we can aim to minimize harm to those existing users. > The fix replaces a 32-bit `addl %edx, %eax` with the 64-bit variant > `addq %rdx, %rax`. The 1-extra byte of code size from using the > 64-bit instruction doesn't contribute to overall code size as the > next target is aligned and has multiple bytes of `nop` padding > before it. As well all the logic between the add and `ret` still > fits in the same fetch block, so the cost of this change is > basically zero. OK. > The relevant sequential logic can be seen in the following > pseudo-code: > ``` > /* > * rsi = a > * rdi = b > * rdx = len - 32 > */ > /* cmp a[0:15] and b[0:15]. Since length is known to be [17, 32] > in this case, this check is also assumed to cover a[0:(31 - len)] > and b[0:(31 - len)]. */ > movups (%rsi), %xmm0 > movups (%rdi), %xmm1 > PCMPEQ %xmm0, %xmm1 > pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax > subl %ecx, %eax > jnz L(END_NEQ) > > /* cmp a[len-16:len-1] and b[len-16:len-1]. */ > movups 16(%rsi, %rdx), %xmm0 > movups 16(%rdi, %rdx), %xmm1 > PCMPEQ %xmm0, %xmm1 > pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax > subl %ecx, %eax > jnz L(END_NEQ2) > ret > > L(END2): > /* Position first mismatch. */ > bsfl %eax, %eax > > /* The sequential version is able to assume this value is a > positive 32-bit value because the first check included bytes in > range a[0:(31 - len)] and b[0:(31 - len)] so `eax` must be > greater than `31 - len` so the minimum value of `edx` + `eax` is > `(len - 32) + (32 - len) >= 0`. In the concurrent case, however, > `a` or `b` could have been changed so a mismatch in `eax` less or > equal than `(31 - len)` is possible (the new low bound is `(16 - > len)`. This can result in a negative 32-bit signed integer, which > when non-sign extended to 64-bits is a random large value this is s/this/that/g > out of bounds. */ addl %edx, %eax Please put the addl on a new line. > > /* Crash here because 32-bit negative number in `eax` non-sign > extends to out of bounds 64-bit offset. */ > movzbl 16(%rdi, %rax), %ecx > movzbl 16(%rsi, %rax), %eax > ``` > > This fix is quite simple, just make the `addl %edx, %eax` 64 bit (i.e > `addq %rdx, %rax`). This prevents the 32-bit non-sign extension > and since `eax` is still a low bound of `16 - len` the `rdx + rax` > is bound by `(len - 32) - (16 - len) >= -16`. Since we have a > fixed offset of `16` in the memory access this must be in bounds. > --- > sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S > index afd450d020..34e60e567d 100644 > --- a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S > +++ b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S > @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0): > setg %dl > leal -1(%rdx, %rdx), %eax > # else > - addl %edx, %eax > + addq %rdx, %rax OK. > movzbl (VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rsi, %rax), %ecx > movzbl (VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rdi, %rax), %eax > subl %ecx, %eax
diff --git a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S index afd450d020..34e60e567d 100644 --- a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S +++ b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0): setg %dl leal -1(%rdx, %rdx), %eax # else - addl %edx, %eax + addq %rdx, %rax movzbl (VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rsi, %rax), %ecx movzbl (VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rdi, %rax), %eax subl %ecx, %eax
In the case of INCORRECT usage of `memcmp(a, b, N)` where `a` and `b` are concurrently modified as `memcmp` runs, there can be a SIGSEGV in `L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0)` because the sequential logic assumes that `(rdx - 32 + rax)` is a positive 32-bit integer. To be clear, this "fix" does not mean this usage of `memcmp` is supported. `memcmp` is incorrect when the values of `a` and/or `b` are modified while its running, and that incorrectness may manifest itself as a SIGSEGV. That being said, if we can make the results less dramatic with no cost to regular use cases, there is no harm in doing so. The fix replaces a 32-bit `addl %edx, %eax` with the 64-bit variant `addq %rdx, %rax`. The 1-extra byte of code size from using the 64-bit instruction doesn't contribute to overall code size as the next target is aligned and has multiple bytes of `nop` padding before it. As well all the logic between the add and `ret` still fits in the same fetch block, so the cost of this change is basically zero. The relevant sequential logic can be seen in the following pseudo-code: ``` /* * rsi = a * rdi = b * rdx = len - 32 */ /* cmp a[0:15] and b[0:15]. Since length is known to be [17, 32] in this case, this check is also assumed to cover a[0:(31 - len)] and b[0:(31 - len)]. */ movups (%rsi), %xmm0 movups (%rdi), %xmm1 PCMPEQ %xmm0, %xmm1 pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax subl %ecx, %eax jnz L(END_NEQ) /* cmp a[len-16:len-1] and b[len-16:len-1]. */ movups 16(%rsi, %rdx), %xmm0 movups 16(%rdi, %rdx), %xmm1 PCMPEQ %xmm0, %xmm1 pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax subl %ecx, %eax jnz L(END_NEQ2) ret L(END2): /* Position first mismatch. */ bsfl %eax, %eax /* The sequential version is able to assume this value is a positive 32-bit value because the first check included bytes in range a[0:(31 - len)] and b[0:(31 - len)] so `eax` must be greater than `31 - len` so the minimum value of `edx` + `eax` is `(len - 32) + (32 - len) >= 0`. In the concurrent case, however, `a` or `b` could have been changed so a mismatch in `eax` less or equal than `(31 - len)` is possible (the new low bound is `(16 - len)`. This can result in a negative 32-bit signed integer, which when non-sign extended to 64-bits is a random large value this is out of bounds. */ addl %edx, %eax /* Crash here because 32-bit negative number in `eax` non-sign extends to out of bounds 64-bit offset. */ movzbl 16(%rdi, %rax), %ecx movzbl 16(%rsi, %rax), %eax ``` This fix is quite simple, just make the `addl %edx, %eax` 64 bit (i.e `addq %rdx, %rax`). This prevents the 32-bit non-sign extension and since `eax` is still a low bound of `16 - len` the `rdx + rax` is bound by `(len - 32) - (16 - len) >= -16`. Since we have a fixed offset of `16` in the memory access this must be in bounds. --- sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)