[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190906214209.GK9017@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2019 17:42:09 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] glob: implement GLOB_ALTDIRFUNC et al
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 09:40:22PM +0200, Ismael Luceno wrote:
> diff --git a/include/glob.h b/include/glob.h
> index 0ff70bdfeef2..26ea65cd1097 100644
> --- a/include/glob.h
> +++ b/include/glob.h
> @@ -16,7 +16,16 @@ typedef struct {
> char **gl_pathv;
> size_t gl_offs;
> int __dummy1;
> +
> +#if defined(_BSD_SOURCE) || defined(_GNU_SOURCE)
> + void (*gl_closedir)(void *);
> + struct dirent *(*gl_readdir)(void *);
> + void *(*gl_opendir)(const char *);
> + int (*gl_lstat)(const char *__restrict, struct stat *__restrict);
> + int (*gl_stat)(const char *__restrict, struct stat *__restrict);
> +#else
> void *__dummy2[5];
> +#endif
> } glob_t;
I think you need to forward-declare at least struct stat, and possibly
also struct dirent, so that they refer to the same types as the
declarations elsewhere. At least the argument list is a different
scope and declares a *different* struct stat shadowing the file-scope
one if the file-scope one is not already declared.
With the above change and:
> diff --git a/src/regex/glob.c b/src/regex/glob.c
> index 7780e21ee113..4f329f053fe0 100644
> --- a/src/regex/glob.c
> +++ b/src/regex/glob.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
> #define _BSD_SOURCE
^^^^^^^^^^^
combined, every use of g->[something] in glob() is now undefined
behavior if the caller was using a standard profile where the
__dummy2-containing version of glob_t above is the one that's used.
That's because it's accessing one struct type via an lvalue of a
different struct type.
> +#include <sys/stat.h>
> #include <glob.h>
> #include <fnmatch.h>
> -#include <sys/stat.h>
Unrelated: this change is gratuitous.
> @@ -224,6 +232,10 @@ static int expand_tilde(char **pat, char *buf, size_t *pos)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void wrap_closedir(void *p) { __closedir(p); }
> +static struct dirent *wrap_readdir(void *d) { return __readdir(d); }
> +static void *wrap_opendir(const char *path) { return __opendir(path); }
> +
> int glob(const char *restrict pat, int flags, int (*errfunc)(const char *path, int err), glob_t *restrict g)
> {
> struct match head = { .next = NULL }, *tail = &head;
> @@ -231,9 +243,24 @@ int glob(const char *restrict pat, int flags, int (*errfunc)(const char *path, i
> size_t offs = (flags & GLOB_DOOFFS) ? g->gl_offs : 0;
^^^^^^^^^^
These are the accesses that become UB. To make them well-defined,
they'd need to be something like G(g,gl_offs), where
#define G(g,m) (*(1?(void*)((char*)(g)+offsetof(glob_t,m)):&((glob_t){0}).m)
is the cleanest abstraction I can think of for the monstrosity needed
to access "something layout-compatible with glob_t, but not glob_t, at
address g".
Imposing this ugliness to avoid UB is part of why I'm hesitant about
this functionality. I think there should be good motivation for it if
we want to go forward with it.
> int error = 0;
> char buf[PATH_MAX];
> + struct dirfn dirfn;
>
> if (!errfunc) errfunc = ignore_err;
>
> + if (flags & GLOB_ALTDIRFUNC) {
> + dirfn.closedir = g->gl_closedir;
> + dirfn.readdir = g->gl_readdir;
> + dirfn.opendir = g->gl_opendir;
> + dirfn.lstat = g->gl_lstat;
> + dirfn.stat = g->gl_stat;
> + } else {
> + dirfn.closedir = wrap_closedir;
> + dirfn.readdir = wrap_readdir;
> + dirfn.opendir = wrap_opendir;
> + dirfn.lstat = lstat;
> + dirfn.stat = stat;
> + }
> +
> if (!(flags & GLOB_APPEND)) {
> g->gl_offs = offs;
> g->gl_pathc = 0;
> @@ -249,7 +276,7 @@ int glob(const char *restrict pat, int flags, int (*errfunc)(const char *path, i
> if ((flags & (GLOB_TILDE | GLOB_TILDE_CHECK)) && *p == '~')
> error = expand_tilde(&s, buf, &pos);
> if (!error)
> - error = do_glob(buf, pos, 0, s, flags, errfunc, &tail);
> + error = do_glob(buf, pos, 0, s, flags, errfunc, &dirfn, &tail);
> free(p);
> }
Not necessary for correctness, but if we're adding a context structure
that gets passed down to each level of do_glob, we might as well put
the errfunc in it too, and possibly also flags and &tail in it, so
that we reduce the amount of state at each recursion frame rather than
increasing it.
It's likely this would make more sense to do as a separate patch
though, to keep the diffs clear.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
