[lkml]   [2019]   [May]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 0/7] crypto: x86: Fix indirect function call casts
On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 6:36 AM Herbert Xu <> wrote:
> On Tue, May 07, 2019 at 02:50:46PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> >
> > I don't know yet. It's difficult to read the code with 2 layers of macros.
> >
> > Hence why I asked why you didn't just change the prototypes to be compatible.
> I agree. Kees, since you're changing this anyway please make it
> look better not worse.

Do you mean I should use the typedefs in the new macros? I'm not aware
of a way to use a typedef to declare a function body, so I had to
repeat them. I'm open to suggestions!

As far as "fixing the prototypes", the API is agnostic of the context
type, and uses void *. And also it provides a way to call the same
function with different pointer types on the other arguments:

For example, quoting the existing code:

asmlinkage void twofish_dec_blk(struct twofish_ctx *ctx, u8 *dst,
const u8 *src);

Which is used for ecb and cbc:

#define GLUE_FUNC_CAST(fn) ((common_glue_func_t)(fn))
#define GLUE_CBC_FUNC_CAST(fn) ((common_glue_cbc_func_t)(fn))
static const struct common_glue_ctx twofish_dec = {
.fn_u = { .ecb = GLUE_FUNC_CAST(twofish_dec_blk) }

static const struct common_glue_ctx twofish_dec_cbc = {
.fn_u = { .cbc = GLUE_CBC_FUNC_CAST(twofish_dec_blk) }

which have different prototypes:

typedef void (*common_glue_func_t)(void *ctx, u8 *dst, const u8 *src);
typedef void (*common_glue_cbc_func_t)(void *ctx, u128 *dst, const u128 *src);
struct common_glue_func_entry {
unsigned int num_blocks; /* number of blocks that @fn will process */
union {
common_glue_func_t ecb;
common_glue_cbc_func_t cbc;
common_glue_ctr_func_t ctr;
common_glue_xts_func_t xts;
} fn_u;

What CFI dislikes is calling a func(void *ctx, ...) when the actual
function is, for example, func(struct twofish_ctx *ctx, ...).

This needs to be fixed at the call site, not the static initializers,
and since the call site is void, there needs to be a static inline
that will satisfy the types.

I'm open to suggestions! :)


Kees Cook

 \ /
  Last update: 2019-05-08 23:09    [W:0.090 / U:0.328 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site