- 10 Apr, 2023 1 commit
-
-
sundb authored
## Issue When we use GCC-12 later or clang 9.0 later to build with `-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=3`, we can see the following buffer overflow: ``` === REDIS BUG REPORT START: Cut & paste starting from here === 6263:M 06 Apr 2023 08:59:12.915 # Redis 255.255.255 crashed by signal: 6, si_code: -6 6263:M 06 Apr 2023 08:59:12.915 # Crashed running the instruction at: 0x7f03d59efa7c ------ STACK TRACE ------ EIP: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(pthread_kill+0x12c)[0x7f03d59efa7c] Backtrace: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x42520)[0x7f03d599b520] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(pthread_kill+0x12c)[0x7f03d59efa7c] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(raise+0x16)[0x7f03d599b476] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(abort+0xd3)[0x7f03d59817f3] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x896f6)[0x7f03d59e26f6] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__fortify_fail+0x2a)[0x7f03d5a8f76a] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x1350c6)[0x7f03d5a8e0c6] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(+0xd5e80)[0x557cddd3be80] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(feedReplicationBufferWithObject+0x78)[0x557cddd3c768] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(replicationFeedSlaves+0x1a4)[0x557cddd3cbc4] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(+0x8721a)[0x557cddced21a] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(call+0x47a)[0x557cddcf38ea] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(processCommand+0xbf4)[0x557cddcf4aa4] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(processInputBuffer+0xe6)[0x557cddd22216] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(readQueryFromClient+0x3a8)[0x557cddd22898] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(+0x1b9134)[0x557cdde1f134] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(aeMain+0x119)[0x557cddce5349] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(main+0x466)[0x557cddcd6716] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(+0x29d90)[0x7f03d5982d90] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0x80)[0x7f03d5982e40] src/redis-server 127.0.0.1:25111(_start+0x25)[0x557cddcd7025] ``` The main reason is that when FORTIFY_SOURCE is enabled, GCC or clang will enhance some common functions, such as `strcpy`, `memcpy`, `fgets`, etc, so that they can detect buffer overflow errors and stop program execution, thus improving the safety of the program. We use `zmalloc_usable_size()` everywhere to use memory blocks, but that is an abuse since the malloc_usable_size() isn't meant for this kind of use, it is for diagnostics only. That is also why the behavior is flaky when built with _FORTIFY_SOURCE, the compiler can sense that we reach outside the allocated block and SIGABRT. ### Solution If we need to use the additional memory we got, we need to use a dummy realloc with `alloc_size` attribute and no inlining, (see `extend_to_usable`) to let the compiler see the large of memory we need to use. This can either be an implicit call inside `z*usable` that returns the size, so that the caller doesn't have any other worry, or it can be a normal zmalloc call which means that if the caller wants to use zmalloc_usable_size it must also use extend_to_usable. ### Changes This PR does the following: 1) rename the current z[try]malloc_usable family to z[try]malloc_internal and don't expose them to users outside zmalloc.c, 2) expose a new set of `z[*]_usable` family that use z[*]_internal and `extend_to_usable()` implicitly, the caller gets the size of the allocation and it is safe to use. 3) go over all the users of `zmalloc_usable_size` and convert them to use the `z[*]_usable` family if possible. 4) in the places where the caller can't use `z[*]_usable` and store the real size, and must still rely on zmalloc_usable_size, we still make sure that the allocation used `z[*]_usable` (which has a call to `extend_to_usable()`) and ignores the returning size, this way a later call to `zmalloc_usable_size` is still safe. [4] was done for module.c and listpack.c, all the others places (sds, reply proto list, replication backlog, client->buf) are using [3]. Co-authored-by:
Oran Agra <oran@redislabs.com>
-
- 16 Feb, 2021 1 commit
-
-
yihuang authored
Avoid repeated reallocs growing the listpack while entries are being added. This is done by pre-allocating the listpack to near maximum size, and using malloc_size to check if it needs realloc or not. When the listpack reaches the maximum number of entries, we shrink it to fit it's used size. Co-authored-by:
Viktor Söderqvist <viktor@zuiderkwast.se> Co-authored-by:
Oran Agra <oran@redislabs.com>
-
- 01 Dec, 2017 2 commits
- 27 Mar, 2017 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
-
- 25 Jul, 2015 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
-
- 08 Nov, 2012 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
-
- 01 Jul, 2010 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
networking related stuff moved into networking.c moved more code more work on layout of source code SDS instantaneuos memory saving. By Pieter and Salvatore at VMware ;) cleanly compiling again after the first split, now splitting it in more C files moving more things around... work in progress split replication code splitting more Sets split Hash split replication split even more splitting more splitting minor change
-
- 19 Feb, 2010 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
A problem with replication with multiple slaves connectiong to a single master fixed. It was due to a typo, and reported on github by the user micmac. Also the copyright year fixed from many files.
-
- 28 May, 2009 1 commit
-
-
antirez authored
-
- 19 May, 2009 2 commits