[ Upstream commit 0a549ed22c ]
The 'i' passed as an assertion message is a size_t, so should use '%zu',
not '%d'.
This was found by annotating the _MSG() variants of KUnit's assertions
to let gcc validate the format strings.
Fixes: bb95ebbe89 ("lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST")
Signed-off-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com>
Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Reviewed-by: Justin Stitt <justinstitt@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
One of the "legitimate" uses of strncpy() is copying a NUL-terminated
string into a fixed-size non-NUL-terminated character array. To avoid
the weaknesses and ambiguity of intent when using strncpy(), provide
replacement functions that explicitly distinguish between trailing
padding and not, and require the destination buffer size be discoverable
by the compiler.
For example:
struct obj {
int foo;
char small[4] __nonstring;
char big[8] __nonstring;
int bar;
};
struct obj p;
/* This will truncate to 4 chars with no trailing NUL */
strncpy(p.small, "hello", sizeof(p.small));
/* p.small contains 'h', 'e', 'l', 'l' */
/* This will NUL pad to 8 chars. */
strncpy(p.big, "hello", sizeof(p.big));
/* p.big contains 'h', 'e', 'l', 'l', 'o', '\0', '\0', '\0' */
When the "__nonstring" attributes are missing, the intent of the
programmer becomes ambiguous for whether the lack of a trailing NUL
in the p.small copy is a bug. Additionally, it's not clear whether
the trailing padding in the p.big copy is _needed_. Both cases
become unambiguous with:
strtomem(p.small, "hello");
strtomem_pad(p.big, "hello", 0);
See also https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/90
Expand the memcpy KUnit tests to include these functions.
Cc: Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@sang-engineering.com>
Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>
Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
Cc: Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
A common idiom in kernel code is to wipe the contents of a structure
starting from a given member. These open-coded cases are usually difficult
to read and very sensitive to struct layout changes. Like memset_after(),
introduce a new helper, memset_startat() that takes the target struct
instance, the byte to write, and the member name where zeroing should
start.
Note that this doesn't zero padding preceding the target member. For
those cases, memset_after() should be used on the preceding member.
Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@privacyrequired.com>
Cc: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
Cc: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
A common idiom in kernel code is to wipe the contents of a structure
after a given member. This is especially useful in places where there is
trailing padding. These open-coded cases are usually difficult to read
and very sensitive to struct layout changes. Introduce a new helper,
memset_after() that takes the target struct instance, the byte to write,
and the member name after which the zeroing should start.
Cc: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Francis Laniel <laniel_francis@privacyrequired.com>
Cc: Vincenzo Frascino <vincenzo.frascino@arm.com>
Cc: Daniel Axtens <dja@axtens.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
Before changing anything about memcpy(), memmove(), and memset(), add
run-time tests to check basic behaviors for any regressions.
Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
