public inbox for libc-alpha@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Carlos O'Donell <carlos@redhat.com>
To: Noah Goldstein <goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: hjl.tools@gmail.com, carlos@systemhalted.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] x86: Prevent SIG11 in memcmp-sse2 when data is concurrently modified [BZ #29863]
Date: Tue, 13 Dec 2022 21:41:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8dc9f68a-c736-0996-76f8-ab7aeb4ccc00@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221214001147.2814047-1-goldstein.w.n@gmail.com>

Please post a v2. Thanks!

Subject: x86: Prevent SIGSEGV in memcmp-sse2 when data is concurrently modified [BZ #29863]

Replaces SIG11 with SIGSEGV (the documented name of the signal).

On 12/13/22 19:11, Noah Goldstein via Libc-alpha wrote:
> In the case of INCORRECT usage of `memcmp(a, b, N)` where `a` and `b`
> are concurrently modified as `memcmp` runs, there can be a SIG11 in

s/SIG11/SIGSEGV/g

> `L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0)` because the sequential logic assumes
> that `(rdx - 32 + rax)` is a positive 32-bit integer.
> 
> To be clear, this "fix" does not mean this usage of `memcmp` is
> supported. `memcmp` is incorrect when the values of `a` and/or `b`
> are modified while its running, and that incorrectness may manifest
> itself as a SIG-11. That being said, if we can make the results

s/SIG-11/SIGSEGV/g

> less dramatic with no cost to regular uses cases, there is no harm
> in doing so.

I agree that a user focused change like this is going to be a balance between
keeping it working for an unsupported use case versus the cost to the library.
Given that you've found a low-cost way to support the incorrect but idiomatic
use case then I have no sustained objections to this patch. However, this won't
be the last we hear of this as we continue down the path of optimizing against
a well defined memory model.

> The fix replaces a 32-bit `addl %edx, %eax` with the 64-bit variant
> `addq %rdx, %rax`. The 1-extra byte of code size from using the
> 64-bit instruction doesn't contribute to overall code size as the
> next target is aligned and has multiple bytes of `nop` padding
> before it. As well all the logic between the add and `ret` still
> fits in the same fetch block, so the cost of this change is
> basically zero.

OK.
 
> The sequential logic makes the assume behind the following code:

Suggest:
The relevant sequential logic can be seen in the following code:

> ```
>     /*
>      * rsi = a
>      * rdi = b
>      * rdx = len - 32
>      */
>     /* cmp a[0:15] and b[0:15]. Since length is known to be [17, 32]
>     in this case, this check is also assume to cover a[0:(31 - len)]

s/assume/assumed/g

>     and b[0:(31 - len)].  */
> 	movups	(%rsi), %xmm0
> 	movups	(%rdi), %xmm1
> 	PCMPEQ	%xmm0, %xmm1
> 	pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax
> 	subl	%ecx, %eax
> 	jnz	L(END_NEQ)
> 
>     /* cmp a[len-16:len-1] and b[len-16:len-1].  */
>     movups	16(%rsi, %rdx), %xmm0
> 	movups	16(%rdi, %rdx), %xmm1
> 	PCMPEQ	%xmm0, %xmm1
> 	pmovmskb %xmm1, %eax
> 	subl	%ecx, %eax
> 	jnz	L(END_NEQ2)
>     ret
> 
> L(END2):
>     /* Position first mismatch.  */
>     bsfl %eax, %eax
> 
>     /* BUG IS FROM THIS. The sequential version is able to assume this

s/BUG IS FROM THIS. //g

>     value is a positive 32-bit value because first check included

s/because first/because the first/g

>     bytes in range a[0:(31 - len)], b[0:(31 - len)] so `eax` must be

s/,/ and/g

>     greater than `31 - len` so the minimum value of `edx` + `eax` is
>     `(len - 32) + (32 - len) >= 0`. In the concurrent case, however,
>     `a` or `b` could have been changed so a mismatch in `eax` less or
>     equal than `(31 - len)` is possible (the new low bound in `(16 -

s/in/is/g

>     len)`. This can result in a negative 32-bit signed integer, which
>     when non-sign extended to 64-bits is a random large value out of

s/out of/that is out of/g

>     bounds. */
>     addl %edx, %eax
> 
>     /* Crash here because 32-bit negative number in `eax` non-sign
>     extends to out of bounds 64-bit offset.  */
>     movzbl 16(%rdi, %rax), %ecx
>     movzbl 16(%rsi, %rax), %eax
> ```
> 
> This fix is quite simple, just make the `addl %edx, %eax` 64 bit (i.e
> `addq %rdx, %rax`). This prevent the 32-bit non-sign extension

s/prevent/prevents/g

> and since `eax` still a low bound of `16 - len` the `rdx + rax`

s/still/is still/g

> is bound by `(len - 32) - (16 - len) >= -16`. Since we have a
> fixed offset of `16` in the memory access this must be inbounds.

s/inbounds/in bounds/g

> ---
>  sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S
> index afd450d020..34e60e567d 100644
> --- a/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S
> +++ b/sysdeps/x86_64/multiarch/memcmp-sse2.S
> @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ L(ret_nonzero_vec_end_0):
>  	setg	%dl
>  	leal	-1(%rdx, %rdx), %eax
>  #  else
> -	addl	%edx, %eax
> +	addq	%rdx, %rax

OK. 64-bit addq.

>  	movzbl	(VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rsi, %rax), %ecx
>  	movzbl	(VEC_SIZE * -1 + SIZE_OFFSET)(%rdi, %rax), %eax
>  	subl	%ecx, %eax

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.


  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-14  2:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-14  0:11 Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14  2:41 ` Carlos O'Donell [this message]
2022-12-14  9:04   ` Andreas Schwab
2022-12-14  3:25 ` [PATCH v2] x86: Prevent SIGSEGV " Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14  4:42   ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-12-14  7:36 ` [PATCH v3] " Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14 16:09   ` H.J. Lu
2022-12-14 16:57     ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-12-14 17:18       ` Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14 18:52     ` Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14 16:57   ` Carlos O'Donell
2022-12-14 16:07 ` [PATCH v1] x86: Prevent SIG11 " H.J. Lu
2022-12-14 18:52 ` [PATCH v4] x86: Prevent SIGSEGV " Noah Goldstein
2022-12-14 21:35   ` H.J. Lu
2023-01-10 22:02     ` Sunil Pandey
2023-01-10 23:02       ` Noah Goldstein

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=8dc9f68a-c736-0996-76f8-ab7aeb4ccc00@redhat.com \
    --to=carlos@redhat.com \
    --cc=carlos@systemhalted.org \
    --cc=goldstein.w.n@gmail.com \
    --cc=hjl.tools@gmail.com \
    --cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).