kevin/linux
1
Fork 0
Code
master
linux/lib/memcpy_kunit.c

515 lines
15 KiB
C
Raw Permalink Normal View History

lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/*
* Test cases for memcpy(), memmove(), and memset().
*/
#define pr_fmt(fmt) KBUILD_MODNAME ": " fmt
#include <kunit/test.h>
#include <linux/device.h>
#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/kernel.h>
#include <linux/mm.h>
#include <linux/module.h>
#include <linux/overflow.h>
#include <linux/slab.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
#include <linux/vmalloc.h>
struct some_bytes {
union {
u8 data[32];
struct {
u32 one;
u16 two;
u8 three;
/* 1 byte hole */
u32 four[4];
};
};
};
#define check(instance, v) do { \
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(instance.data) != 32); \
string: Introduce strtomem() and strtomem_pad() 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>
2022-08-26 11:04:43 -07:00
for (size_t i = 0; i < sizeof(instance.data); i++) { \
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test, instance.data[i], v, \
lib: memcpy_kunit: Fix an invalid format specifier in an assertion msg 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: bb95ebbe89a7 ("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>
2024-02-21 02:27:16 -07:00
"line %d: '%s' not initialized to 0x%02x @ %zu (saw 0x%02x)\n", \
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
__LINE__, #instance, v, i, instance.data[i]); \
} \
} while (0)
#define compare(name, one, two) do { \
BUILD_BUG_ON(sizeof(one) != sizeof(two)); \
string: Introduce strtomem() and strtomem_pad() 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>
2022-08-26 11:04:43 -07:00
for (size_t i = 0; i < sizeof(one); i++) { \
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
KUNIT_EXPECT_EQ_MSG(test, one.data[i], two.data[i], \
lib: memcpy_kunit: Fix an invalid format specifier in an assertion msg 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: bb95ebbe89a7 ("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>
2024-02-21 02:27:16 -07:00
"line %d: %s.data[%zu] (0x%02x) != %s.data[%zu] (0x%02x)\n", \
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
__LINE__, #one, i, one.data[i], #two, i, two.data[i]); \
} \
kunit_info(test, "ok: " TEST_OP "() " name "\n"); \
} while (0)
static void memcpy_test(struct kunit *test)
{
#define TEST_OP "memcpy"
struct some_bytes control = {
.data = { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
},
};
struct some_bytes zero = { };
struct some_bytes middle = {
.data = { 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
},
};
struct some_bytes three = {
.data = { 0x00, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x00, 0x00, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20, 0x20,
},
};
struct some_bytes dest = { };
int count;
u8 *ptr;
/* Verify static initializers. */
check(control, 0x20);
check(zero, 0);
compare("static initializers", dest, zero);
/* Verify assignment. */
dest = control;
compare("direct assignment", dest, control);
/* Verify complete overwrite. */
memcpy(dest.data, zero.data, sizeof(dest.data));
compare("complete overwrite", dest, zero);
/* Verify middle overwrite. */
dest = control;
memcpy(dest.data + 12, zero.data, 7);
compare("middle overwrite", dest, middle);
/* Verify argument side-effects aren't repeated. */
dest = control;
ptr = dest.data;
count = 1;
memcpy(ptr++, zero.data, count++);
ptr += 8;
memcpy(ptr++, zero.data, count++);
compare("argument side-effects", dest, three);
#undef TEST_OP
}
x86/mem: Move memmove to out of line assembler When building ARCH=i386 with CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_FULL=y, it's possible (depending on additional configs which I have not been able to isolate) to observe a failure during register allocation: error: inline assembly requires more registers than available when memmove is inlined into tcp_v4_fill_cb() or tcp_v6_fill_cb(). memmove is quite large and probably shouldn't be inlined due to size alone. A noinline function attribute would be the simplest fix, but there's a few things that stand out with the current definition: In addition to having complex constraints that can't always be resolved, the clobber list seems to be missing %bx. By using numbered operands rather than symbolic operands, the constraints are quite obnoxious to refactor. Having a large function be 99% inline asm is a code smell that this function should simply be written in stand-alone out-of-line assembler. Moving this to out of line assembler guarantees that the compiler cannot inline calls to memmove. This has been done previously for 64b: commit 9599ec0471de ("x86-64, mem: Convert memmove() to assembly file and fix return value bug") That gives the opportunity for other cleanups like fixing the inconsistent use of tabs vs spaces and instruction suffixes, and the label 3 appearing twice. Symbolic operands, local labels, and additional comments would provide this code with a fresh coat of paint. Finally, add a test that tickles the `rep movsl` implementation to test it for correctness, since it has implicit operands. Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Suggested-by: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Tested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221018172155.287409-1-ndesaulniers%40google.com
2022-10-18 10:21:55 -07:00
static unsigned char larger_array [2048];
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
static void memmove_test(struct kunit *test)
{
#define TEST_OP "memmove"
struct some_bytes control = {
.data = { 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
},
};
struct some_bytes zero = { };
struct some_bytes middle = {
.data = { 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00,
0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
},
};
struct some_bytes five = {
.data = { 0x00, 0x00, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x00, 0x00, 0x00, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
},
};
struct some_bytes overlap = {
.data = { 0x00, 0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x05, 0x06, 0x07,
0x08, 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0B, 0x0C, 0x0D, 0x0E, 0x0F,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
},
};
struct some_bytes overlap_expected = {
.data = { 0x00, 0x01, 0x00, 0x01, 0x02, 0x03, 0x04, 0x07,
0x08, 0x09, 0x0A, 0x0B, 0x0C, 0x0D, 0x0E, 0x0F,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99, 0x99,
},
};
struct some_bytes dest = { };
int count;
u8 *ptr;
/* Verify static initializers. */
check(control, 0x99);
check(zero, 0);
compare("static initializers", zero, dest);
/* Verify assignment. */
dest = control;
compare("direct assignment", dest, control);
/* Verify complete overwrite. */
memmove(dest.data, zero.data, sizeof(dest.data));
compare("complete overwrite", dest, zero);
/* Verify middle overwrite. */
dest = control;
memmove(dest.data + 12, zero.data, 7);
compare("middle overwrite", dest, middle);
/* Verify argument side-effects aren't repeated. */
dest = control;
ptr = dest.data;
count = 2;
memmove(ptr++, zero.data, count++);
ptr += 9;
memmove(ptr++, zero.data, count++);
compare("argument side-effects", dest, five);
/* Verify overlapping overwrite is correct. */
ptr = &overlap.data[2];
memmove(ptr, overlap.data, 5);
compare("overlapping write", overlap, overlap_expected);
x86/mem: Move memmove to out of line assembler When building ARCH=i386 with CONFIG_LTO_CLANG_FULL=y, it's possible (depending on additional configs which I have not been able to isolate) to observe a failure during register allocation: error: inline assembly requires more registers than available when memmove is inlined into tcp_v4_fill_cb() or tcp_v6_fill_cb(). memmove is quite large and probably shouldn't be inlined due to size alone. A noinline function attribute would be the simplest fix, but there's a few things that stand out with the current definition: In addition to having complex constraints that can't always be resolved, the clobber list seems to be missing %bx. By using numbered operands rather than symbolic operands, the constraints are quite obnoxious to refactor. Having a large function be 99% inline asm is a code smell that this function should simply be written in stand-alone out-of-line assembler. Moving this to out of line assembler guarantees that the compiler cannot inline calls to memmove. This has been done previously for 64b: commit 9599ec0471de ("x86-64, mem: Convert memmove() to assembly file and fix return value bug") That gives the opportunity for other cleanups like fixing the inconsistent use of tabs vs spaces and instruction suffixes, and the label 3 appearing twice. Symbolic operands, local labels, and additional comments would provide this code with a fresh coat of paint. Finally, add a test that tickles the `rep movsl` implementation to test it for correctness, since it has implicit operands. Suggested-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> Suggested-by: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com> Signed-off-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com> Reviewed-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Tested-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221018172155.287409-1-ndesaulniers%40google.com
2022-10-18 10:21:55 -07:00
/* Verify larger overlapping moves. */
larger_array[256] = 0xAAu;
/*
* Test a backwards overlapping memmove first. 256 and 1024 are
* important for i386 to use rep movsl.
*/
memmove(larger_array, larger_array + 256, 1024);
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, larger_array[0], 0xAAu);
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, larger_array[256], 0x00);
KUNIT_ASSERT_NULL(test,
memchr(larger_array + 1, 0xaa, ARRAY_SIZE(larger_array) - 1));
/* Test a forwards overlapping memmove. */
larger_array[0] = 0xBBu;
memmove(larger_array + 256, larger_array, 1024);
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, larger_array[0], 0xBBu);
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ(test, larger_array[256], 0xBBu);
KUNIT_ASSERT_NULL(test, memchr(larger_array + 1, 0xBBu, 256 - 1));
KUNIT_ASSERT_NULL(test,
memchr(larger_array + 257, 0xBBu, ARRAY_SIZE(larger_array) - 257));
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
#undef TEST_OP
}
static void memset_test(struct kunit *test)
{
#define TEST_OP "memset"
struct some_bytes control = {
.data = { 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
},
};
struct some_bytes complete = {
.data = { 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff,
0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff,
0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff,
0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff, 0xff,
},
};
struct some_bytes middle = {
.data = { 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31,
0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31,
0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x31, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
},
};
struct some_bytes three = {
.data = { 0x60, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x61, 0x61, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
},
};
string.h: Introduce memset_after() for wiping trailing members/padding 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>
2021-05-17 20:16:57 -07:00
struct some_bytes after = {
.data = { 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x72,
0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72,
0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72,
0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72, 0x72,
},
};
string.h: Introduce memset_startat() for wiping trailing members and padding 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>
2021-05-17 20:16:57 -07:00
struct some_bytes startat = {
.data = { 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30, 0x30,
0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79,
0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79,
0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79, 0x79,
},
};
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
struct some_bytes dest = { };
int count, value;
u8 *ptr;
/* Verify static initializers. */
check(control, 0x30);
check(dest, 0);
/* Verify assignment. */
dest = control;
compare("direct assignment", dest, control);
/* Verify complete overwrite. */
memset(dest.data, 0xff, sizeof(dest.data));
compare("complete overwrite", dest, complete);
/* Verify middle overwrite. */
dest = control;
memset(dest.data + 4, 0x31, 16);
compare("middle overwrite", dest, middle);
/* Verify argument side-effects aren't repeated. */
dest = control;
ptr = dest.data;
value = 0x60;
count = 1;
memset(ptr++, value++, count++);
ptr += 8;
memset(ptr++, value++, count++);
compare("argument side-effects", dest, three);
string.h: Introduce memset_after() for wiping trailing members/padding 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>
2021-05-17 20:16:57 -07:00
/* Verify memset_after() */
dest = control;
memset_after(&dest, 0x72, three);
compare("memset_after()", dest, after);
string.h: Introduce memset_startat() for wiping trailing members and padding 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>
2021-05-17 20:16:57 -07:00
/* Verify memset_startat() */
dest = control;
memset_startat(&dest, 0x79, four);
compare("memset_startat()", dest, startat);
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
#undef TEST_OP
}
kunit/memcpy: Add dynamic size and window tests The "side effects" memmove() test accidentally found[1] a corner case in the recent refactoring of the i386 assembly memmove(), but missed another corner case. Instead of hoping to get lucky next time, implement much more complete tests of memcpy() and memmove() -- especially the moving window overlap for memmove() -- which catches all the issues encountered and should catch anything new. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAKwvOdkaKTa2aiA90VzFrChNQM6O_ro+b7VWs=op70jx-DKaXA@mail.gmail.com Cc: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Tested-by: Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com> Signed-off-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
2022-09-28 14:17:05 -07:00
static u8 large_src[1024];
static u8 large_dst[2048];
static const u8 large_zero[2048];
static void set_random_nonzero(struct kunit *test, u8 *byte)
{
int failed_rng = 0;
while (*byte == 0) {
get_random_bytes(byte, 1);
KUNIT_ASSERT_LT_MSG(test, failed_rng++, 100,
"Is the RNG broken?");
}
}
static void init_large(struct kunit *test)
{
/* Get many bit patterns. */
get_random_bytes(large_src, ARRAY_SIZE(large_src));
/* Make sure we have non-zero edges. */
set_random_nonzero(test, &large_src[0]);
set_random_nonzero(test, &large_src[ARRAY_SIZE(large_src) - 1]);
/* Explicitly zero the entire destination. */
memset(large_dst, 0, ARRAY_SIZE(large_dst));
}
/*
* Instead of an indirect function call for "copy" or a giant macro,
* use a bool to pick memcpy or memmove.
*/
static void copy_large_test(struct kunit *test, bool use_memmove)
{
init_large(test);
/* Copy a growing number of non-overlapping bytes ... */
for (int bytes = 1; bytes <= ARRAY_SIZE(large_src); bytes++) {
/* Over a shifting destination window ... */
for (int offset = 0; offset < ARRAY_SIZE(large_src); offset++) {
int right_zero_pos = offset + bytes;
int right_zero_size = ARRAY_SIZE(large_dst) - right_zero_pos;
/* Copy! */
if (use_memmove)
memmove(large_dst + offset, large_src, bytes);
else
memcpy(large_dst + offset, large_src, bytes);
/* Did we touch anything before the copy area? */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(large_dst, large_zero, offset), 0,
"with size %d at offset %d", bytes, offset);
/* Did we touch anything after the copy area? */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(&large_dst[right_zero_pos], large_zero, right_zero_size), 0,
"with size %d at offset %d", bytes, offset);
/* Are we byte-for-byte exact across the copy? */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(large_dst + offset, large_src, bytes), 0,
"with size %d at offset %d", bytes, offset);
/* Zero out what we copied for the next cycle. */
memset(large_dst + offset, 0, bytes);
}
/* Avoid stall warnings if this loop gets slow. */
cond_resched();
}
}
static void memcpy_large_test(struct kunit *test)
{
copy_large_test(test, false);
}
static void memmove_large_test(struct kunit *test)
{
copy_large_test(test, true);
}
/*
* On the assumption that boundary conditions are going to be the most
* sensitive, instead of taking a full step (inc) each iteration,
* take single index steps for at least the first "inc"-many indexes
* from the "start" and at least the last "inc"-many indexes before
* the "end". When in the middle, take full "inc"-wide steps. For
* example, calling next_step(idx, 1, 15, 3) with idx starting at 0
* would see the following pattern: 1 2 3 4 7 10 11 12 13 14 15.
*/
static int next_step(int idx, int start, int end, int inc)
{
start += inc;
end -= inc;
if (idx < start || idx + inc > end)
inc = 1;
return idx + inc;
}
static void inner_loop(struct kunit *test, int bytes, int d_off, int s_off)
{
int left_zero_pos, left_zero_size;
int right_zero_pos, right_zero_size;
int src_pos, src_orig_pos, src_size;
int pos;
/* Place the source in the destination buffer. */
memcpy(&large_dst[s_off], large_src, bytes);
/* Copy to destination offset. */
memmove(&large_dst[d_off], &large_dst[s_off], bytes);
/* Make sure destination entirely matches. */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test, memcmp(&large_dst[d_off], large_src, bytes), 0,
"with size %d at src offset %d and dest offset %d",
bytes, s_off, d_off);
/* Calculate the expected zero spans. */
if (s_off < d_off) {
left_zero_pos = 0;
left_zero_size = s_off;
right_zero_pos = d_off + bytes;
right_zero_size = ARRAY_SIZE(large_dst) - right_zero_pos;
src_pos = s_off;
src_orig_pos = 0;
src_size = d_off - s_off;
} else {
left_zero_pos = 0;
left_zero_size = d_off;
right_zero_pos = s_off + bytes;
right_zero_size = ARRAY_SIZE(large_dst) - right_zero_pos;
src_pos = d_off + bytes;
src_orig_pos = src_pos - s_off;
src_size = right_zero_pos - src_pos;
}
/* Check non-overlapping source is unchanged.*/
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(&large_dst[src_pos], &large_src[src_orig_pos], src_size), 0,
"with size %d at src offset %d and dest offset %d",
bytes, s_off, d_off);
/* Check leading buffer contents are zero. */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(&large_dst[left_zero_pos], large_zero, left_zero_size), 0,
"with size %d at src offset %d and dest offset %d",
bytes, s_off, d_off);
/* Check trailing buffer contents are zero. */
KUNIT_ASSERT_EQ_MSG(test,
memcmp(&large_dst[right_zero_pos], large_zero, right_zero_size), 0,
"with size %d at src offset %d and dest offset %d",
bytes, s_off, d_off);
/* Zero out everything not already zeroed.*/
pos = left_zero_pos + left_zero_size;
memset(&large_dst[pos], 0, right_zero_pos - pos);
}
static void memmove_overlap_test(struct kunit *test)
{
/*
* Running all possible offset and overlap combinations takes a
* very long time. Instead, only check up to 128 bytes offset
* into the destination buffer (which should result in crossing
* cachelines), with a step size of 1 through 7 to try to skip some
* redundancy.
*/
static const int offset_max = 128; /* less than ARRAY_SIZE(large_src); */
static const int bytes_step = 7;
static const int window_step = 7;
static const int bytes_start = 1;
static const int bytes_end = ARRAY_SIZE(large_src) + 1;
init_large(test);
/* Copy a growing number of overlapping bytes ... */
for (int bytes = bytes_start; bytes < bytes_end;
bytes = next_step(bytes, bytes_start, bytes_end, bytes_step)) {
/* Over a shifting destination window ... */
for (int d_off = 0; d_off < offset_max; d_off++) {
int s_start = max(d_off - bytes, 0);
int s_end = min_t(int, d_off + bytes, ARRAY_SIZE(large_src));
/* Over a shifting source window ... */
for (int s_off = s_start; s_off < s_end;
s_off = next_step(s_off, s_start, s_end, window_step))
inner_loop(test, bytes, d_off, s_off);
/* Avoid stall warnings. */
cond_resched();
}
}
}
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
static struct kunit_case memcpy_test_cases[] = {
KUNIT_CASE(memset_test),
KUNIT_CASE(memcpy_test),
kunit: memcpy: Mark tests as slow using test attributes Mark slow memcpy KUnit tests using test attributes. Tests marked as slow are as follows: memcpy_large_test, memmove_test, memmove_large_test, and memmove_overlap_test. These tests were the slowest of the memcpy tests and relatively slower to most other KUnit tests. Most of these tests are already skipped when CONFIG_MEMCPY_SLOW_KUNIT_TEST is not enabled. These tests can now be filtered using the KUnit test attribute filtering feature. Example: --filter "speed>slow". This will run only the tests that have speeds faster than slow. The slow attribute will also be outputted in KTAP. Note: This patch is intended to replace the use of CONFIG_MEMCPY_SLOW_KUNIT_TEST and to potentially deprecate this feature. This patch does not remove the config option but does add a note to the config definition commenting on this future shift. Reviewed-by: David Gow <davidgow@google.com> Acked-by: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Rae Moar <rmoar@google.com> Signed-off-by: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>
2023-07-25 14:25:17 -07:00
KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(memcpy_large_test),
KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(memmove_test),
KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(memmove_large_test),
KUNIT_CASE_SLOW(memmove_overlap_test),
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
{}
};
static struct kunit_suite memcpy_test_suite = {
.name = "memcpy",
.test_cases = memcpy_test_cases,
};
kunit_test_suite(memcpy_test_suite);
kunit/fortify: add missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macros make allmodconfig && make W=1 C=1 reports: WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in lib/memcpy_kunit.o WARNING: modpost: missing MODULE_DESCRIPTION() in lib/fortify_kunit.o Add the missing invocations of the MODULE_DESCRIPTION() macro. Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20240531-md-lib-fortify_source-v1-1-2c37f7fbaafc@quicinc.com Signed-off-by: Jeff Johnson <quic_jjohnson@quicinc.com> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org> Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
2024-05-31 15:45:22 -07:00
MODULE_DESCRIPTION("test cases for memcpy(), memmove(), and memset()");
lib: Introduce CONFIG_MEMCPY_KUNIT_TEST 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>
2021-06-25 17:45:15 -07:00
MODULE_LICENSE("GPL");
Copy Permalink