Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Determine if EP attribute fields should be ssize_t #13

Closed
shefty opened this issue Sep 3, 2014 · 2 comments
Closed

Determine if EP attribute fields should be ssize_t #13

shefty opened this issue Sep 3, 2014 · 2 comments
Assignees
@shefty
Labels
enhancement
Milestone
alpha release

Comments

@shefty
Copy link
Member

shefty commented Sep 3, 2014

There are several fi_ep_attr fields which are size_t. Determine which, if any, should be ssize_t, so that a negative value can be used to indicate that the provider can select the maximum or best default value.
@shefty shefty added this to the alpha release milestone Sep 3, 2014
@shefty shefty self-assigned this Sep 18, 2014
@shefty
Copy link
Member Author

shefty commented Sep 19, 2014

A constant value can be used in place of a negative value. This would only reserve 1 value, rather than reducing the supportable values in half. For the fields in question, only non-negative values make sense. Add a constant value to indicate that the provider should select the best option.

@shefty
Copy link
Member Author

shefty commented Sep 19, 2014

EP attributes are already optional input into fi_getinfo. A provider may increase the size of any attribute based on other specified capabilities that are required. So a value of 0 works fine for a default value, given that EP capability flags will indicate if a specific feature is desired.

@shefty shefty closed this as completed Sep 19, 2014
@shefty shefty mentioned this issue Nov 5, 2014
Closed
bturrubiates pushed a commit to bturrubiates/libfabric that referenced this issue Feb 18, 2015
@hppritcha
Merge pull request ofiwg#13 from bturrubiates/topic/fi-source
51899ce 
Topic/fi source
@shefty shefty mentioned this issue Sep 26, 2015
Closed
nikitaxgusev pushed a commit to nikitaxgusev/libfabric that referenced this issue Oct 29, 2019
@ddurnov
Merge pull request ofiwg#13 from ngusev/dlsym
f773997 
util_mem_monitor.c: fix call of getauxval when glibc < 2.16 for memhooks
@frostedcmos frostedcmos mentioned this issue Dec 4, 2019
Closed
@frostedcmos frostedcmos mentioned this issue Feb 19, 2020
Closed
@frostedcmos frostedcmos mentioned this issue Feb 28, 2020
Closed
Honggang-LI added a commit to Honggang-LI/libfabric that referenced this issue Dec 17, 2020
@Honggang-LI
src/common.c: fix a stack-buffer-overflow issue
5343004 
ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7fff4c61e7e0 at pc 0x14f2cb7ae0b9 bp 0x7fff4c61e650 sp 0x7fff4c61ddd8
WRITE of size 17 at 0x7fff4c61e7e0 thread T0
    #0 0x14f2cb7ae0b8  (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb40b8)
    ofiwg#1 0x14f2cb7aedd2 in vsscanf (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb4dd2)
    ofiwg#2 0x14f2cb7aeede in __interceptor_sscanf (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb4ede)
    ofiwg#3 0x14f2cb230766 in ofi_addr_format src/common.c:401
    ofiwg#4 0x14f2cb233238 in ofi_str_toaddr src/common.c:780
    ofiwg#5 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_handle_ib_ud_addr prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1670
    ofiwg#6 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_get_match_infos prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1787
    ofiwg#7 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_getinfo prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1841
    ofiwg#8 0x14f2cb21fc28 in fi_getinfo_ src/fabric.c:1010
    ofiwg#9 0x14f2cb25fcc0 in ofi_get_core_info prov/util/src/util_attr.c:298
    ofiwg#10 0x14f2cb269b20 in ofix_getinfo prov/util/src/util_attr.c:321
    ofiwg#11 0x14f2cb3e29fd in rxd_getinfo prov/rxd/src/rxd_init.c:122
    ofiwg#12 0x14f2cb21fc28 in fi_getinfo_ src/fabric.c:1010
    ofiwg#13 0x407150 in ft_getinfo common/shared.c:794
    ofiwg#14 0x414917 in ft_init_fabric common/shared.c:1042
    ofiwg#15 0x402f40 in run functional/bw.c:155
    ofiwg#16 0x402f40 in main functional/bw.c:252
    ofiwg#17 0x14f2ca1b28e2 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x238e2)
    ofiwg#18 0x401d1d in _start (/root/libfabric/fabtests/functional/fi_bw+0x401d1d)

Address 0x7fff4c61e7e0 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 48 in frame
    #0 0x14f2cb2306f3 in ofi_addr_format src/common.c:397

  This frame has 1 object(s):
    [32, 48) 'fmt' <== Memory access at offset 48 overflows this variable
HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb40b8)
Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
  0x1000698bbca0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcb0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcc0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcd0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbce0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
=>0x1000698bbcf0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00[f2]f2 f3 f3
  0x1000698bbd00: f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1
  0x1000698bbd10: f1 f1 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2
  0x1000698bbd20: f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2
  0x1000698bbd30: f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
  0x1000698bbd40: 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 00
Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
  Addressable:           00
  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
  Heap left redzone:       fa
  Freed heap region:       fd
  Stack left redzone:      f1
  Stack mid redzone:       f2
  Stack right redzone:     f3
  Stack after return:      f5
  Stack use after scope:   f8
  Global redzone:          f9
  Global init order:       f6
  Poisoned by user:        f7
  Container overflow:      fc
  Array cookie:            ac
  Intra object redzone:    bb
  ASan internal:           fe
  Left alloca redzone:     ca
  Right alloca redzone:    cb

Fixes: 5d31276 ("common: Redo address string conversions")
Signed-off-by: Honggang Li <honli@redhat.com>
@Honggang-LI Honggang-LI mentioned this issue Dec 17, 2020
Merged
@shefty shefty mentioned this issue Dec 18, 2020
Merged
shefty pushed a commit that referenced this issue Dec 19, 2020
@Honggang-LI @shefty
src/common.c: fix a stack-buffer-overflow issue
8c2f159 
ERROR: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow on address 0x7fff4c61e7e0 at pc 0x14f2cb7ae0b9 bp 0x7fff4c61e650 sp 0x7fff4c61ddd8
WRITE of size 17 at 0x7fff4c61e7e0 thread T0
    #0 0x14f2cb7ae0b8  (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb40b8)
    #1 0x14f2cb7aedd2 in vsscanf (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb4dd2)
    #2 0x14f2cb7aeede in __interceptor_sscanf (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb4ede)
    #3 0x14f2cb230766 in ofi_addr_format src/common.c:401
    #4 0x14f2cb233238 in ofi_str_toaddr src/common.c:780
    #5 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_handle_ib_ud_addr prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1670
    #6 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_get_match_infos prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1787
    #7 0x14f2cb314332 in vrb_getinfo prov/verbs/src/verbs_info.c:1841
    #8 0x14f2cb21fc28 in fi_getinfo_ src/fabric.c:1010
    #9 0x14f2cb25fcc0 in ofi_get_core_info prov/util/src/util_attr.c:298
    #10 0x14f2cb269b20 in ofix_getinfo prov/util/src/util_attr.c:321
    #11 0x14f2cb3e29fd in rxd_getinfo prov/rxd/src/rxd_init.c:122
    #12 0x14f2cb21fc28 in fi_getinfo_ src/fabric.c:1010
    #13 0x407150 in ft_getinfo common/shared.c:794
    #14 0x414917 in ft_init_fabric common/shared.c:1042
    #15 0x402f40 in run functional/bw.c:155
    #16 0x402f40 in main functional/bw.c:252
    #17 0x14f2ca1b28e2 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x238e2)
    #18 0x401d1d in _start (/root/libfabric/fabtests/functional/fi_bw+0x401d1d)

Address 0x7fff4c61e7e0 is located in stack of thread T0 at offset 48 in frame
    #0 0x14f2cb2306f3 in ofi_addr_format src/common.c:397

  This frame has 1 object(s):
    [32, 48) 'fmt' <== Memory access at offset 48 overflows this variable
HINT: this may be a false positive if your program uses some custom stack unwind mechanism or swapcontext
      (longjmp and C++ exceptions *are* supported)
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: stack-buffer-overflow (/lib64/libasan.so.5+0xb40b8)
Shadow bytes around the buggy address:
  0x1000698bbca0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcb0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcc0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbcd0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
  0x1000698bbce0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00
=>0x1000698bbcf0: 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1 f1 f1 00 00[f2]f2 f3 f3
  0x1000698bbd00: f3 f3 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 f1 f1
  0x1000698bbd10: f1 f1 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2
  0x1000698bbd20: f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2
  0x1000698bbd30: f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00
  0x1000698bbd40: 00 00 00 06 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 f2 00 00 00 00 00 00
Shadow byte legend (one shadow byte represents 8 application bytes):
  Addressable:           00
  Partially addressable: 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
  Heap left redzone:       fa
  Freed heap region:       fd
  Stack left redzone:      f1
  Stack mid redzone:       f2
  Stack right redzone:     f3
  Stack after return:      f5
  Stack use after scope:   f8
  Global redzone:          f9
  Global init order:       f6
  Poisoned by user:        f7
  Container overflow:      fc
  Array cookie:            ac
  Intra object redzone:    bb
  ASan internal:           fe
  Left alloca redzone:     ca
  Right alloca redzone:    cb

Fixes: 5d31276 ("common: Redo address string conversions")
Signed-off-by: Honggang Li <honli@redhat.com>
@frostedcmos frostedcmos mentioned this issue Mar 30, 2021
Closed
@frostedcmos frostedcmos mentioned this issue Aug 5, 2021
Closed
@chien-intel chien-intel mentioned this issue Jun 6, 2022
Closed
@bfaccini bfaccini mentioned this issue Jul 11, 2022
Closed
@aingerson aingerson mentioned this issue Oct 11, 2022
Closed
@finjulhich finjulhich mentioned this issue May 13, 2023
Closed
@Juee14Desai Juee14Desai mentioned this issue Sep 15, 2023
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@shefty shefty

Labels
enhancement
Projects
None yet
Milestone
alpha release
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@shefty