[PATCH] Fix PR64078

Bernd Edlinger bernd.edlinger@hotmail.de
Tue Aug 30 09:38:00 GMT 2016


On 08/30/16 10:21, Tom de Vries wrote:
> On 29/08/16 18:43, Bernd Edlinger wrote:
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Actually my patch missed to fix one combination: -m32 with -fpic
>>
>> make check-gcc-c++ RUNTESTFLAGS="ubsan.exp=object-size-9.c --tool_opts
>> '-m32 -fpic'"
>>
>> FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c   -O2  execution test
>> FAIL: c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c   -O2 -flto
>> -fno-use-linker-plugin -flto-partition=none  execution test
>>
>> The problem here is that the functions f2 and f3 access a stack-
>> based object out of bounds and that is inlined in main and
>> therefore smashes the return address of main in this case.
>>
>> A possible fix could look like follows:
>>
>> Index: object-size-9.c
>> ===================================================================
>> --- object-size-9.c    (revision 239794)
>> +++ object-size-9.c    (working copy)
>> @@ -93,5 +93,9 @@
>>   #endif
>>     f4 (12);
>>     f5 (12);
>> +#ifdef __cplusplus
>> +  /* Stack may be smashed by f2/f3 above.  */
>> +  __builtin_exit (0);
>> +#endif
>>     return 0;
>>   }
>>
>>
>> Do you think that this should be fixed too?
>
> I think it should be fixed. Ideally, we'd prevent the out-of-bounds
> writes to have harmful effects, but I'm not sure how to enforce that.
>
> This works for me:
> ...
> diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c
> b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c
> index 46f1fb9..fec920d 100644
> --- a/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c
> +++ b/gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c
> @@ -31,6 +31,7 @@ static struct C
>   f2 (int i)
>   {
>     struct C x;
> +  struct C x2;
>     x.d[i] = 'z';
>     return x;
>   }
> @@ -45,6 +46,7 @@ static struct C
>   f3 (int i)
>   {
>     struct C x;
> +  struct C x2;
>     char *p = x.d;
>     p += i;
>     *p = 'z';
> ...
>
> But I have no idea how stable this solution is.
>

At least x2 could not be opimized away, as it is no POD,
but there is no guarantee, that x2 comes after x on the stack.
Another possibility, which seems to work as well:


Index: gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c
===================================================================
--- gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c	(revision 239794)
+++ gcc/testsuite/c-c++-common/ubsan/object-size-9.c	(working copy)
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ f1 (struct T x, int i)
  static struct C
  f2 (int i)
  {
-  struct C x;
+  struct C x __attribute__ ((aligned(16)));
    x.d[i] = 'z';
    return x;
  }
@@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ f2 (int i)
  static struct C
  f3 (int i)
  {
-  struct C x;
+  struct C x __attribute ((aligned(16)));
    char *p = x.d;
    p += i;
    *p = 'z';



Thanks
Bernd.



More information about the Gcc-patches mailing list