Re: [PATCH v3] diff-delta: use safe integer arithmetic
- From
- Srujith Poojary <poojarysrujith@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 24, 2026, 17:26 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CABh_KWhDcPM6rJROmVd7_oGZ7i3tmX5da-DZX=KJmvSyCxNH_A@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqfqxv13d6.fsf@gitster.g>
On Sat, Oct 24, 2026 at 9:45 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
Show 66 quoted lines
>
> "Srujith A Poojary via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
> writes:
>
> > From: Srujith A Poojary <poojarysrujith@gmail.com>
> >
> > Replace manual multiplication and addition in create_delta_index()
> > with safe integer helpers (st_mult, st_add, st_add3) to prevent potential
> > overflows when computing memory allocation sizes.
> >
> > On 32-bit platforms, struct alignment padding could cause the total
> > allocation size calculation to exceed 2^32, making safe integer arithmetic
> > necessary.
>
> I wonder if "X could cause Y" above skips a bit too many steps. I
> was expecting more along the lines of ...
>
> We will need to allocate N instances of A and M instances of B, N
> and M are capped to X and Y respectively by this code
>
> ... code snippet ...
>
> and size of an instance of A is 8 and size of B could be either W or
> Z. When size of B is W, then the total allocation would be ...
>
> And that analysis applies only on the first allocation. I didn't
> even look at the packed side of the allocation size, expecting that
> you would know how to analyze after seeing my example on the other
> allocation.
>
> > Note that hsize + 1 inside st_add3() is safe from overflow
> > because hsize is capped at 2^26 early in the function.
>
> It is misleading to say hsize+1 is inside st_add3(), though.
>
>
> > diff --git a/diff-delta.c b/diff-delta.c
> > index 7cbedeb507..efebce3aca 100644
> > --- a/diff-delta.c
> > +++ b/diff-delta.c
> > @@ -162,8 +162,8 @@ struct delta_index * create_delta_index(const void *buf, size_t bufsize)
> > hmask = hsize - 1;
> >
> > /* allocate lookup index */
> > - memsize = sizeof(*hash) * hsize +
> > - sizeof(*entry) * entries;
> > + memsize = st_add(st_mult(sizeof(*hash), hsize),
> > + st_mult(sizeof(*entry), entries));
> > mem = malloc(memsize);
> > if (!mem)
> > return NULL;
> > @@ -258,9 +258,9 @@ struct delta_index * create_delta_index(const void *buf, size_t bufsize)
> > * Now create the packed index in array form
> > * rather than linked lists.
> > */
> > - memsize = sizeof(*index)
> > - + sizeof(*packed_hash) * (hsize+1)
> > - + sizeof(*packed_entry) * entries;
> > + memsize = st_add3(sizeof(*index),
> > + st_mult(sizeof(*packed_hash), hsize + 1),
> > + st_mult(sizeof(*packed_entry), entries));
> > mem = malloc(memsize);
> > if (!mem) {
> > free(hash);
> >
> > base-commit: 47fdf2208c5b94c8cc01c106b8f7c85efb91c926Hi Junio,
Thank you for the detailed correction.
I have expanded the commit message to include the step-by-step breakdown for both the unpacked and packed index allocations, detailing the caps on hsize (2^26) and entries (2^28) alongside struct padding on 32-bit systems. I also corrected the phrasing regarding (hsize + 1) being passed as an argument to st_add3().
I have updated the patch series accordingly.
Best regards, Srujith