So I am trying to dynamically allocate a buffer on module initialization. The buffer needs to be in scope at all times as it stores data that user space programs interact with. So here is my code:
static char* file_data
#define MAX_SIZE 256
.
.
.
{
file_data = kzalloc(MAX_SIZE, GFP_KERNEL)
.
.
.
}
However when I do sizeof file_data it always returns 4. What am I doing wrong?
Edit: The buffer stores input from a user space program, but 4 characters is all that can be stored.
size_t read_file(char* __user buf, size_t count)
{
unsigned int len = 0;
len = copy_to_user(buf, file_data, count);
return count;
}
ssize_t write_file(char* __user buf, size_t count)
{
if(count >= MAX_SIZE)
return -EINVAL;
copy_from_user(file_data, buf,count)
return count;
}
file_data is a pointer. On a 32-bit platform, it's size is 32 bits, or 4 bytes. What you want to know is the size of the data pointed to by file_data. You can't use the sizeof operator for this because sizeof is a compile time operation. You can't use it on things allocated dynamically at run time.
(Besides, you already know the size of the data pointed to by file_data -- it's MAX_SIZE?)
char *file_data is a pointer to a char. Evidently you're on a 32-bit system so any pointer is 4 bytes. The compiler (which handles sizeof) doesn't know or care how much memory you're allocating for file_data to point to, it just knows you're asking for the size of the pointer (which you are, whether you meant to or not). If you want the size of the memory it points to, you'll have to keep track of it yourself.
Related
I need to provide a huge circular buffer (a few GB) for the bus-mastering DMA PCIe device implemented in FPGA.
The buffers should not be reserved at the boot time. Therefore, the buffer may be not contiguous.
The device supports scatter-gather (SG) operation, but for performance reasons, the addresses and lengths of consecutive contiguous segments of the buffer are stored inside the FPGA.
Therefore, usage of standard 4KB pages is not acceptable (there would be up to 262144 segments for each 1GB of the buffer).
The right solution should allocate the buffer consisting of 2MB hugepages in the user space (reducing the maximum number of segments by factor of 512).
The virtual address of the buffer should be transferred to the kernel driver via ioctl. Then the addresses and the length of the segments should be calculated and written to the FPGA.
In theory, I could use get_user_pages to create the list of the pages, and then call sg_alloc_table_from_pages to obtain the SG list suitable to program the DMA engine in FPGA.
Unfortunately, in this approach I must prepare the intermediate list of page structures with length of 262144 pages per 1GB of the buffer. This list is stored in RAM, not in the FPGA, so it is less problematic, but anyway it would be good to avoid it.
In fact I don't need to keep the pages maped for the kernel, as the hugepages are protected against swapping out, and they are mapped for the user space application that will process the received data.
So what I'm looking for is a function sg_alloc_table_from_user_hugepages, that could take such a user-space address of the hugepages-based memory buffer, and transfer it directly into the right scatterlist, without performing unnecessary and memory-consuming mapping for the kernel.
Of course such a function should verify that the buffer indeed consists of hugepages.
I have found and read these posts: (A), (B), but couldn't find a good answer.
Is there any official method to do it in the current Linux kernel?
At the moment I have a very inefficient solution based on get_user_pages_fast:
int sgt_prepare(const char __user *buf, size_t count,
struct sg_table * sgt, struct page *** a_pages,
int * a_n_pages)
{
int res = 0;
int n_pages;
struct page ** pages = NULL;
const unsigned long offset = ((unsigned long)buf) & (PAGE_SIZE-1);
//Calculate number of pages
n_pages = (offset + count + PAGE_SIZE - 1) >> PAGE_SHIFT;
printk(KERN_ALERT "n_pages: %d",n_pages);
//Allocate the table for pages
pages = vzalloc(sizeof(* pages) * n_pages);
printk(KERN_ALERT "pages: %p",pages);
if(pages == NULL) {
res = -ENOMEM;
goto sglm_err1;
}
//Now pin the pages
res = get_user_pages_fast(((unsigned long)buf & PAGE_MASK), n_pages, 0, pages);
printk(KERN_ALERT "gupf: %d",res);
if(res < n_pages) {
int i;
for(i=0; i<res; i++)
put_page(pages[i]);
res = -ENOMEM;
goto sglm_err1;
}
//Now create the sg-list
res = sg_alloc_table_from_pages(sgt, pages, n_pages, offset, count, GFP_KERNEL);
printk(KERN_ALERT "satf: %d",res);
if(res < 0)
goto sglm_err2;
*a_pages = pages;
*a_n_pages = n_pages;
return res;
sglm_err2:
//Here we jump if we know that the pages are pinned
{
int i;
for(i=0; i<n_pages; i++)
put_page(pages[i]);
}
sglm_err1:
if(sgt) sg_free_table(sgt);
if(pages) kfree(pages);
* a_pages = NULL;
* a_n_pages = 0;
return res;
}
void sgt_destroy(struct sg_table * sgt, struct page ** pages, int n_pages)
{
int i;
//Free the sg list
if(sgt->sgl)
sg_free_table(sgt);
//Unpin pages
for(i=0; i < n_pages; i++) {
set_page_dirty(pages[i]);
put_page(pages[i]);
}
}
The sgt_prepare function builds the sg_table sgt structure that i can use to create the DMA mapping. I have verified that it contains the number of entries equal to the number of hugepages used.
Unfortunately, it requires that the list of the pages is created (allocated and returned via the a_pages pointer argument), and kept as long as the buffer is used.
Therefore, I really dislike that solution. Now I have 256 2MB hugepages used as a DMA buffer. It means that I have to create and keeep unnecessary 128*1024 page structures. I also waste 512 MB of kernel address space for unnecessary kernel mapping.
The interesting question is if the a_pages may be kept only temporarily (until the sg-list is created)? In theory it should be possible, as the pages are still locked...
I am executing the code as given below for the shared memory, but now if i have to give the number of strings and string pattern from the command line, what should i do?? and sebsequently also i have to read the strings and string patterns from shared memory region.
Also if i have to reverse the strings and stored at the same location for that what should i do??
Please help me on this problem.
#define SHMSIZE 500 /*Shared Memory Size given by us */
int main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
int shmid;
key_t key;
char *shm;
key = 5876;
shmid = shmget(key,SHMSIZE,IPC_CREAT| 0666); /*Creating Shared Memory */
if(shmid < 0)
{
perror("shmget");
exit(1);
}
shm = shmat(shmid,NULL,0); /* Shared Memory Attachment */
if(shm == (char *) -1)
{
perror("shmat");
exit(1);
}
printf("Memory attached at %X\n",(int) shm); /* Printing the address where Memory is attached */
sprintf(shm,"God is Great"); /* Write a string to the shared memory */
shmdt(shm); /* Deattach the shared memory segment */
shm = shmat(shmid,(void *) 0x50000000,0); /*Reattach the shared memory segment */
printf("Memory Reattached at %X\n",(int) shm);
printf("%s\n",shm); /* Print the desired string */
return 0;
}
In according to take input from user, you need to parse what passed through argv. Then copy the values into your code and write it over the shared memory region. From your code you can do the following:
sprintf(shm, argv[1]);
to parse the first parameter passed to your shared memory region. And to reverse the string, copy the string from shared memory into a variable, then reverse it and finally, write it into that shared memory region from your client code. Since, you've created shm with 666 permission this should allow client to write on that portion.
Take a look at here in case you need to understand the concept properly ( http://www.cs.cf.ac.uk/Dave/C/node27.html)
From what I understand, a typical buffer overflow attack occurs when an attack overflows a buffer of memory on the stack, thus allowing the attacker to inject malicious code and rewrite the return address on the stack to point to that code.
This is a common concern when using functions (such as sscanf) that blindly copy data from one area to another, checking one for a termination byte:
char str[8]; /* holds up to 8 bytes of data */
char *buf = "lots and lots of foobars"; /* way more than 8 bytes of data */
sscanf(buf, "%s", str); /* buffer overflow occurs here! */
I noticed some sysfs_ops store functions in the Linux kernel are implemented with the Linux kernel's version of the sscanf function:
static char str[8]; /* global string */
static ssize_t my_store(struct device *dev,
struct device_attribute *attr,
const char *buf, size_t size)
{
sscanf(buf, "%s", str); /* buf holds more than 8 bytes! */
return size;
}
Suppose this store callback function is set to a writable sysfs attribute. Would a malicious user be able to intentionally overflow the buffer via a write call?
Normally, I would expect guards against buffer overflow attacks -- such as limiting the number of bytes read -- but I see none in a good number of functions (for example in drivers/scsi/scsi_sysfs.c).
Does the implementation of the Linux kernel version of sscanf protect against buffer overflow attacks; or is there another reason -- perhaps buffer overflow attacks are impossible given how the Linux kernel works under the hood?
The Linux sscanf() is vulnerable to buffer overflows; inspection of the source shows this. You can use width specifiers to limit the amount a %s is allowed to write. At some point your str must have had copy_from_user() run on it as well. It is possible the user space to pass some garbage pointer to the kernel.
In the version of Linux you cited, the scsi_sysfs.c does have a buffer overflow. The latest version does not. The committed fix should fix the issue you see.
Short answer:
sscanf, when well called, will not cause buffer overflow, especially in sysfs xxx_store() function. (There are a lot sscanf in sysfs XXX_store() examples), because Linux kernel add a '\0' (zero-terminated) byte after the string (buf[len] = 0;) for your XXX_store() function.
Long answer:
Normally, sysfs are defined to have a strict formatted data. Since you expect 8 bytes at most, it's reasonable to limit the size you get like this:
static char str[8]; /* global string */
static ssize_t my_store(struct device *dev,
struct device_attribute *attr,
const char *buf, size_t size)
{
if (size > 8) {
printk("Error: Input size > 8: too large\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
sscanf(buf, "%s", str); /* buf holds more than 8 bytes! */
return size;
}
(Note: use 9 rather than 8, if you expect a 8-bytes string plus '\n')
(Note that you do reject some inputs such as those with many leading white spaces. However, who would send a string with many leading white spaces? Those who want to break your code, right? If they don't follow your spec, just reject them.)
Note that Linux kernel purposely inserts a '\0' at offset len (i.e. buf[len] = 0;) when the user write len bytes to sysfs purposely for safe sscanf, as said in a comment in kernel 2.6: fs/sysfs/file.c:
static int
fill_write_buffer(struct sysfs_buffer * buffer, const char __user * buf, size_t count)
{
int error;
if (!buffer->page)
buffer->page = (char *)get_zeroed_page(GFP_KERNEL);
if (!buffer->page)
return -ENOMEM;
if (count >= PAGE_SIZE)
count = PAGE_SIZE - 1;
error = copy_from_user(buffer->page,buf,count);
buffer->needs_read_fill = 1;
/* if buf is assumed to contain a string, terminate it by \0,
so e.g. sscanf() can scan the string easily */
buffer->page[count] = 0;
return error ? -EFAULT : count;
}
...
static ssize_t
sysfs_write_file(struct file *file, const char __user *buf, size_t count, loff_t *ppos)
{
struct sysfs_buffer * buffer = file->private_data;
ssize_t len;
mutex_lock(&buffer->mutex);
len = fill_write_buffer(buffer, buf, count);
if (len > 0)
len = flush_write_buffer(file->f_path.dentry, buffer, len);
if (len > 0)
*ppos += len;
mutex_unlock(&buffer->mutex);
return len;
}
Higher kernel version keeps the same logic (though already completely rewritten).
I am having a hard time in manipulating strings while writing module for linux. My problem is that I have a int Array[10] with different values in it. I need to produce a string to be able send to the buffer in my_read procedure. If my array is {0,1,112,20,4,0,0,0,0,0}
then my output should be:
0:(0)
1:-(1)
2:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(112)
3:--------------------(20)
4:----(4)
5:(0)
6:(0)
7:(0)
8:(0)
9:(0)
when I try to place the above strings in char[] arrays some how weird characters end up there
here is the code
int my_read (char *page, char **start, off_t off, int count, int *eof, void *data)
{
int len;
if (off > 0){
*eof =1;
return 0;
}
/* get process tree */
int task_dep=0; /* depth of a task from INIT*/
get_task_tree(&init_task,task_dep);
char tmp[1024];
char A[ProcPerDepth[0]],B[ProcPerDepth[1]],C[ProcPerDepth[2]],D[ProcPerDepth[3]],E[ProcPerDepth[4]],F[ProcPerDepth[5]],G[ProcPerDepth[6]],H[ProcPerDepth[7]],I[ProcPerDepth[8]],J[ProcPerDepth[9]];
int i=0;
for (i=0;i<1024;i++){ tmp[i]='\0';}
memset(A, '\0', sizeof(A));memset(B, '\0', sizeof(B));memset(C, '\0', sizeof(C));
memset(D, '\0', sizeof(D));memset(E, '\0', sizeof(E));memset(F, '\0', sizeof(F));
memset(G, '\0', sizeof(G));memset(H, '\0', sizeof(H));memset(I, '\0', sizeof(I));memset(J, '\0', sizeof(J));
printk("A:%s\nB:%s\nC:%s\nD:%s\nE:%s\nF:%s\nG:%s\nH:%s\nI:%s\nJ:%s\n",A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J);
memset(A,'-',sizeof(A));
memset(B,'-',sizeof(B));
memset(C,'-',sizeof(C));
memset(D,'-',sizeof(D));
memset(E,'-',sizeof(E));
memset(F,'-',sizeof(F));
memset(G,'-',sizeof(G));
memset(H,'-',sizeof(H));
memset(I,'-',sizeof(I));
memset(J,'-',sizeof(J));
printk("A:%s\nB:%s\nC:%s\nD:%s\nE:%s\nF:%s\nG:%s\nH:%s\nI:%s\nJ:%\n",A,B,C,D,E,F,G,H,I,J);
len = sprintf(page,"0:%s(%d)\n1:%s(%d)\n2:%s(%d)\n3:%s(%d)\n4:%s(%d)\n5:%s(%d)\n6:%s(%d)\n7:%s(%d)\n8:%s(%d)\n9:%s(%d)\n",A,ProcPerDepth[0],B,ProcPerDepth[1],C,ProcPerDepth[2],D,ProcPerDepth[3],E,ProcPerDepth[4],F,ProcPerDepth[5],G,ProcPerDepth[6],H,ProcPerDepth[7],I,ProcPerDepth[8],J,ProcPerDepth[9]);
return len;
}
it worked out with this:
char s[500];
memset(s,'-',498);
for (i=len=0;i<10;++i){
len+=sprintf(page+len,"%d:%.*s(%d)\n",i,ProcPerDepth[i],s,ProcPerDepth[i]);
}
I wonder if there is an easy flag to multiply string char in sprintf. thanx –
Here are a some issues:
You have entirely filled the A, B, C ... arrays with characters. Then, you pass them to an I/O routine that is expecting null-terminated strings. Because your strings are not null-terminated, printk() will keep printing whatever is in stack memory after your object until it finds a null by luck.
Multi-threaded kernels like Linux have strict and relatively small constraints regarding stack allocations. All instances in the kernel call chain must fit into a specific size or something will be overwritten. You may not get any detection of this error, just some kind of downstream crash as memory corruption leads to a panic or a wedge. Allocating large and variable arrays on a kernel stack is just not a good idea.
If you are going to write the tmp[] array and properly nul-terminate it, there is no reason to also initialize it. But if you were going to initialize it, you could do so with compiler-generated code by just saying: char tmp[1024] = { 0 }; (A partial initialization of an aggregate requires by C99 initialization of the entire aggregate.) A similar observation applies to the other arrays.
How about getting rid of most of those arrays and most of that code and just doing something along the lines of:
for(i = j = 0; i < n; ++i)
j += sprintf(page + j, "...", ...)
When i execute my code i am getting this error
LPTSTR lpBuffer;
::GetLogicalDriveStrings(1024,lpBuffer);
while(*lpBuffer != NULL)
{
printf("%s\n", lpBuffer); // or MessageBox(NULL, temp, "Test", 0); or whatever
lpBuffer += lstrlen(lpBuffer)+1;
printf("sizeof(lpBuffer) %d\n",lstrlen(lpBuffer));
}
OutPut
C
sizeof(lpBuffer) 3
D
sizeof(lpBuffer) 3
E
sizeof(lpBuffer) 3
F
sizeof(lpBuffer) 0
lpBuffer points to random memory. You need something like this:
LPTSTR lpBuffer = new TCHAR[1025];
edit: Corrected the array size to be 1025 instead of 1024, because the length parameter is 1024. This API requires careful reading.
You are supposed to pass a memory address where the string will be copied. However you have not allocated any space for holding the characters. You need to allocate space before passing it to the GetLogicalDriveStrings function. You can allocate the memory on heap as #Windows programmer suppgested or if the maximum length of the string is known at compile time you can allocate it on stack using TCHAR lpBuffer[1024]; Additinally, you are using printf to print the unicode (may be as it depends on compiler flag). This will not work and will print only first character.
You need to actually pass in a buffer - note that the size of the buffer you pass in needs to be one less than the actual size of the buffer to account for the final terminating '\0' character (I have no idea why the API was designed like that).
Here's a slightly modified version of your example:
#include <windows.h>
#include <tchar.h>
#include <stdio.h>
enum {
BUFSIZE = 1024
};
int _tmain (int argc, TCHAR *argv[])
{
TCHAR szTemp[BUFSIZE];
LPTSTR lpBuffer = szTemp; // point lpBuffer to the buffer we've allocated
szTemp[0] = _T( '\0'); // I'm not sure if this is necessary, but it was
// in the example given for GetLogicalDriveStrings()
GetLogicalDriveStrings( BUFSIZE-1, lpBuffer); // note: BUFSIZE minus 1
while(*lpBuffer != _T('\0'))
{
_tprintf( _T("%s\n"), lpBuffer);
lpBuffer += lstrlen(lpBuffer)+1;
_tprintf( _T("length of lpBuffer: %d\n"),lstrlen(lpBuffer));
}
return 0;
}