The pointer overflow check gives false negatives when dealing with
expressions in which an unsigned value is subtracted from a pointer.
This is summarized in PR33430 [1]: ubsan permits the result of the
subtraction to be greater than "p", but it should not.
To fix the issue, we should track whether or not the pointer expression
is a subtraction. If it is, and the indices are unsigned, we know to
expect "p - <unsigned> <= p".
I've tested this by running check-{llvm,clang} with a stage2
ubsan-enabled build. I've also added some tests to compiler-rt, which
are in D34122.
[1] https://bugs.llvm.org/show_bug.cgi?id=33430
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D34121
llvm-svn: 307955
Adding an unsigned offset to a base pointer has undefined behavior if
the result of the expression would precede the base. An example from
@regehr:
int foo(char *p, unsigned offset) {
return p + offset >= p; // This may be optimized to '1'.
}
foo(p, -1); // UB.
This patch extends the pointer overflow check in ubsan to detect invalid
unsigned pointer index expressions. It changes the instrumentation to
only permit non-negative offsets in pointer index expressions when all
of the GEP indices are unsigned.
Testing: check-llvm, check-clang run on a stage2, ubsan-instrumented
build.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33910
llvm-svn: 305216
I'm not sure why, but on some bots, the order of two instructions are
swapped (as compared to the output on my machine). Loosen up the
CHECK-NEXT directives to deal with this.
Failing bot: http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/clang-with-lto-ubuntu/builds/3097
llvm-svn: 304486
Check pointer arithmetic for overflow.
For some more background on this check, see:
https://wdtz.org/catching-pointer-overflow-bugs.htmlhttps://reviews.llvm.org/D20322
Patch by Will Dietz and John Regehr!
This version of the patch is different from the original in a few ways:
- It introduces the EmitCheckedInBoundsGEP utility which inserts
checks when the pointer overflow check is enabled.
- It does some constant-folding to reduce instrumentation overhead.
- It does not check some GEPs in CGExprCXX. I'm not sure that
inserting checks here, or in CGClass, would catch many bugs.
Possible future directions for this check:
- Introduce CGF.EmitCheckedStructGEP, to detect overflows when
accessing structures.
Testing: Apart from the added lit test, I ran check-llvm and check-clang
with a stage2, ubsan-instrumented clang. Will and John have also done
extensive testing on numerous open source projects.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D33305
llvm-svn: 304459
Vedant Kumar