Re: 66eb78377bf1 - main - libc/amd64: fix overread conditions in stpncpy()
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2025 19:33:32 UTC
I know ~nothing of assembly, but one thing that seems odd to me is that the 'bts' line originally used '%r8d', but the new version uses '%r8'. And yet, the new 'test' line uses '%r8d'. Again, knowing nothing about this, it seems to me that the 'bts' and 'test' should probably be talking about the same thing...? -Ravi (rpokala@) -----Original Message----- From: <owner-src-committers@freebsd.org <mailto:owner-src-committers@freebsd.org>> on behalf of Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com <mailto:Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>> Reply-To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com <mailto:Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>> Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 at 11:00 To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com <mailto:Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>> Cc: Robert Clausecker <fuz@FreeBSD.org <mailto:fuz@FreeBSD.org>>, <src-committers@FreeBSD.org <mailto:src-committers@FreeBSD.org>>, <dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org <mailto:dev-commits-src-all@FreeBSD.org>>, <dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org <mailto:dev-commits-src-main@FreeBSD.org>> Subject: Re: git: 66eb78377bf1 - main - libc/amd64: fix overread conditions in stpncpy() In message <20251216135709.46D25203@slippy.cwsent.com <mailto:20251216135709.46D25203@slippy.cwsent.com>>, Cy Schubert writes: > In message <693ee0f1.3662d.650a5e21@gitrepo.freebsd.org <mailto:693ee0f1.3662d.650a5e21@gitrepo.freebsd.org>>, Robert Clausecker > wri > tes: > > The branch main has been updated by fuz: > > > > URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=66eb78377bf109af1d9e25626bf254 <https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=66eb78377bf109af1d9e25626bf254> > b4 > > 369436ec > > > > commit 66eb78377bf109af1d9e25626bf254b4369436ec > > Author: Robert Clausecker <fuz@FreeBSD.org <mailto:fuz@FreeBSD.org>> > > AuthorDate: 2025-12-10 20:45:18 +0000 > > Commit: Robert Clausecker <fuz@FreeBSD.org <mailto:fuz@FreeBSD.org>> > > CommitDate: 2025-12-14 16:06:05 +0000 > > > > libc/amd64: fix overread conditions in stpncpy() > > > > Due to incorrect unit test design, two overread conditions went > > undetected in the amd64 baseline stpncpy() implementation. > > For buffers of 1--16 and 32 bytes that do not contain nul bytes > > and end exactly at a page boundary, the code would incorrectly > > read 16 bytes from the next page, possibly crossing into an > > unmapped page and crashing the program. If the next page was > > mapped, the code would then proceed with the expected behaviour > > of the stpncpy() function. > > > > Three changes were made to fix the bug: > > > > - an off-by-one error is fixed in the code deciding whether to > > enter the runt case or not, entering it for 0<n<=32 bytes > > instead of 0<n<32 bytes as it was before. > > - in the runt case, the logic to skip reading a second 16-byte > > chunk if the buffer ends in the first chunk was fixed to > > account for buffers that end at a 16-byte boundary but do not > > hold a nul byte. > > - in the runt case, the logic to transform the location of the > > end of the input buffer into a bit mask was fixed to allow > > the case of n==32, which was previously impossible due to the > > incorrect logic for entering said case. > > > > The performance impact should be minimal. > > > > PR: 291359 > > See also: D54169 > > Reported by: Collin Funk <collin.funk1@gmail.com <mailto:collin.funk1@gmail.com>> > > Reviewed by: getz > > Approved by: markj (mentor) > > MFC after: 1 week > > Fixes: 90253d49db09a9b1490c448d05314f3e4bbfa468 (D42519) > > Differential Revision: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D54170 <https://reviews.freebsd.org/D54170> > > --- > > lib/libc/amd64/string/stpncpy.S | 7 ++++--- > > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/libc/amd64/string/stpncpy.S b/lib/libc/amd64/string/stpncp > y. > > S > > index 5ce0dd093a9e..df22bb9f0c53 100644 > > --- a/lib/libc/amd64/string/stpncpy.S > > +++ b/lib/libc/amd64/string/stpncpy.S > > @@ -100,7 +100,7 @@ ARCHENTRY(__stpncpy, baseline) > > movdqa (%rsi), %xmm0 # load head > > and $0xf, %ecx # offset from alignment > > mov $-1, %r9d > > - lea -32(%rcx), %rax # set up overflow-proof compari > > son rdx+rcx<=32 > > + lea -33(%rcx), %rax # set up overflow-proof compari > > son rdx+rcx<=32 > > shl %cl, %r9d # mask of bytes belonging to th > > e string > > sub %rcx, %rdi # adjust RDI to correspond to R > > SI > > pxor %xmm1, %xmm1 > > @@ -223,8 +223,9 @@ ARCHENTRY(__stpncpy, baseline) > > > > /* 1--32 bytes to copy, bounce through the stack */ > > .Lrunt: movdqa %xmm1, bounce+16(%rsp) # clear out rest of on- > > stack copy > > - bts %r10d, %r8d # treat end of buffer as end of > > string > > - and %r9w, %r8w # end of string within first bu > > ffer? > > + bts %r10, %r8 # treat end of buffer as end of > > string > > + and %r9d, %r8d # mask out head before string > > + test $0x1ffff, %r8d # end of string within first ch > > unk or right after? > > jnz 0f # if yes, do not inspect second > > buffer > > > > movdqa 16(%rsi), %xmm0 # load second chunk of input > > > > I've opened PR/291720 regarding a significant regression caused by this > commit. It affects my older machines, resulting in enviornment (getenv) > corruption. It does not affect my newer (and with more RAM) machines. BTW, this brought my postfix server effectively offline. I have not been able to send or receive email until this commit was reverted locally. -- Cheers, Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com <mailto:Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com>> FreeBSD UNIX: <cy@FreeBSD.org <mailto:cy@FreeBSD.org>> Web: https://FreeBSD.org <https://FreeBSD.org> NTP: <cy@nwtime.org <mailto:cy@nwtime.org>> Web: https://nwtime.org <https://nwtime.org> e**(i*pi)+1=0