Re: [PATCH v2 15/17] midx: use 64-bit multiplication for chunk sizes

On 2/4/2021 7:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

"Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

From: Derrick Stolee <redacted>

When calculating the sizes of certain chunks, we should use 64-bit
multiplication always. This allows us to properly predict the chunk
sizes without risk of overflow.

Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <redacted>
---
 midx.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

This one I find somewhat questionable for multiple reasons.

 * the fourth parameter of add_chunk() is of size_t, not uint64_t;
   shouldn't the multiplication be done in type size_t instead?

This is probably appropriate because we will truncate to size_t if
it is smaller than uint64_t.

 * these mutiplications were introduced in "midx: use chunk-format
   API in write_midx_internal()"; that step should use the
   arithmetic with cast (if necessary) from the start, no?

I wanted to isolate these changes specifically so we could be
careful about the multiplications and not be distracted by them
when converting to the chunk-format API. The multiplications were
"moved" by that patch, not "introduced".

 * There is "ctx.entries_nr * MIDX_CHUNKID_OFFSET_WIDTH" passed to
   add_chunk(), in the post-context of the first hunk.  Shouldn't
   that be covered as well?  I didn't grep for all uses of
   add_chunk(), but I wouldn't be surprised if this patch missed
   some of the calls that need the same treatment.

And here is a great example of why it was good to call out these
multiplications in their own patch.

I did a full inspection of all multiplications in midx.c and
found a few more instances of possible overflow. Two are on the
read side, but they require the object lookup chunk to have size
4gb or larger. This is not _that_ far off from possibility! My
multi-pack-index for the Windows repository is currently ~1.6 GB
(in total, including the other chunks).

Thanks,
-Stolee