Re: [PATCH 2/5] slab: Add __alloc_size attributes for better bounds checking
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: 2021-08-18 06:31:02
Also in:
linux-hardening, linux-kbuild, lkml
From: Joe Perches <joe@perches.com>
Date: 2021-08-18 06:31:02
Also in:
linux-hardening, linux-kbuild, lkml
On Tue, 2021-08-17 at 23:16 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:
On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 10:31:32PM -0700, Joe Perches wrote:quoted
On Tue, 2021-08-17 at 22:08 -0700, Kees Cook wrote:quoted
As already done in GrapheneOS, add the __alloc_size attribute for regular kmalloc interfaces, to provide additional hinting for better bounds checking, assisting CONFIG_FORTIFY_SOURCE and other compiler optimizations.
[]
quoted
Lastly __alloc_size should probably be added to checkpatchOh, yes! Thanks for the reminder.quoted
Maybe: --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 161ce7fe5d1e5..1a166b5cf3447 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl@@ -489,7 +489,8 @@ our $Attribute = qr{____cacheline_aligned| ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp| ____cacheline_internodealigned_in_smp| - __weak + __weak| + __alloc_size\s*\(\s*\d+\s*(?:,\s*d+\s*){0,5}\)Why the "{0,5}" bit here? I was expecting just "?". (i.e. it can have either 1 or 2 arguments.)
You are right. I misread the doc. I also missed a \ before the last d. So that last added line should maybe be: (totally untested btw) + __alloc_size\s*\(\s*\d+\s*(?:,\s*\d+\s*)?\)