| Message ID | 20230824164706.2652277-1-peter.maydell@linaro.org |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | util/iov: Avoid dynamic stack allocation | expand |
On Thu, Aug 24, 2023 at 05:47:06PM +0100, Peter Maydell wrote: > From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > > Use autofree heap allocation instead of variable-length array on the > stack. > > The codebase has very few VLAs, and if we can get rid of them all we > can make the compiler error on new additions. This is a defensive > measure against security bugs where an on-stack dynamic allocation > isn't correctly size-checked (e.g. CVE-2021-3527). > > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > --- > Usual "only tested with make check/make check-avocado" caveat. > > util/iov.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Reviewed-by: Eric Blake <eblake@redhat.com> > > diff --git a/util/iov.c b/util/iov.c > index 866fb577f30..7e73948f5e3 100644 > --- a/util/iov.c > +++ b/util/iov.c > @@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ static int sortelem_cmp_src_index(const void *a, const void *b) > */ > void qemu_iovec_clone(QEMUIOVector *dest, const QEMUIOVector *src, void *buf) > { > - IOVectorSortElem sortelems[src->niov]; > + g_autofree IOVectorSortElem *sortelems = g_new(IOVectorSortElem, src->niov); > void *last_end; > int i; > > -- > 2.34.1 >
Cc'ing qemu-block@ (I suppose this will go via a block tree) On 24/8/23 18:47, Peter Maydell wrote: > From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > > Use autofree heap allocation instead of variable-length array on the > stack. > > The codebase has very few VLAs, and if we can get rid of them all we > can make the compiler error on new additions. This is a defensive > measure against security bugs where an on-stack dynamic allocation > isn't correctly size-checked (e.g. CVE-2021-3527). > > Signed-off-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > Signed-off-by: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org> > --- > Usual "only tested with make check/make check-avocado" caveat. > > util/iov.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/util/iov.c b/util/iov.c > index 866fb577f30..7e73948f5e3 100644 > --- a/util/iov.c > +++ b/util/iov.c > @@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ static int sortelem_cmp_src_index(const void *a, const void *b) > */ > void qemu_iovec_clone(QEMUIOVector *dest, const QEMUIOVector *src, void *buf) > { > - IOVectorSortElem sortelems[src->niov]; > + g_autofree IOVectorSortElem *sortelems = g_new(IOVectorSortElem, src->niov); > void *last_end; > int i; >
On Thu, Aug 31, 2023 at 10:26:17AM +0200, Philippe Mathieu-Daudé wrote: > Cc'ing qemu-block@ (I suppose this will go via a block tree) Makes sense. I can queue it through my NBD tree if no one else beats me (since the nbd code is a heavy user of iovs). > > On 24/8/23 18:47, Peter Maydell wrote: > > From: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@redhat.com> > > > > Use autofree heap allocation instead of variable-length array on the > > stack. > > > > The codebase has very few VLAs, and if we can get rid of them all we > > can make the compiler error on new additions. This is a defensive > > measure against security bugs where an on-stack dynamic allocation > > isn't correctly size-checked (e.g. CVE-2021-3527). > >
diff --git a/util/iov.c b/util/iov.c index 866fb577f30..7e73948f5e3 100644 --- a/util/iov.c +++ b/util/iov.c @@ -571,7 +571,7 @@ static int sortelem_cmp_src_index(const void *a, const void *b) */ void qemu_iovec_clone(QEMUIOVector *dest, const QEMUIOVector *src, void *buf) { - IOVectorSortElem sortelems[src->niov]; + g_autofree IOVectorSortElem *sortelems = g_new(IOVectorSortElem, src->niov); void *last_end; int i;