From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@google.com>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@chromium.org>,
Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>,
Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: Fix compare error in function retval_range_within
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 16:41:42 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzapNjmhBYC1YsmwBFNP7rdans9X2StkQ3uQDhAyf7Py7g@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240411122752.2873562-7-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>
On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 5:24 AM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>
> From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
>
> After checking lsm hook return range in verifier, the test case
> "test_progs -t test_lsm" failed, and the failure log says:
>
> libbpf: prog 'test_int_hook': BPF program load failed: Invalid argument
> libbpf: prog 'test_int_hook': -- BEGIN PROG LOAD LOG --
> 0: R1=ctx() R10=fp0
> ; int BPF_PROG(test_int_hook, struct vm_area_struct *vma, @ lsm.c:89
> 0: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r1 +24) ; R0_w=scalar(smin=smin32=-4095,smax=smax32=0) R1=ctx()
>
> [...]
>
> 24: (b4) w0 = -1 ; R0_w=0xffffffff
> ; int BPF_PROG(test_int_hook, struct vm_area_struct *vma, @ lsm.c:89
> 25: (95) exit
> At program exit the register R0 has smin=4294967295 smax=4294967295 should have been in [-4095, 0]
>
> It can be seen that instruction "w0 = -1" zero extended -1 to 64-bit
> register r0, setting both smin and smax values of r0 to 4294967295.
> This resulted in a false reject when r0 was checked with range [-4095, 0].
>
> Given bpf_retval_range is a 32-bit range, this patch fixes it by
> changing the compare between r0 and return range from 64-bit
> operation to 32-bit operation.
>
> Fixes: 8fa4ecd49b81 ("bpf: enforce exact retval range on subprog/callback exit")
> Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 05c7c5f2bec0..5393d576c76f 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -9879,7 +9879,7 @@ static bool in_rbtree_lock_required_cb(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>
> static bool retval_range_within(struct bpf_retval_range range, const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
> {
> - return range.minval <= reg->smin_value && reg->smax_value <= range.maxval;
> + return range.minval <= reg->s32_min_value && reg->s32_max_value <= range.maxval;
are all BPF programs treated as if they return int instead of long? If
not, we probably should have a bool flag in bpf_retval_range whether
comparison should be 32-bit or 64-bit?
> }
>
> static int prepare_func_exit(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int *insn_idx)
> --
> 2.30.2
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-25 23:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-11 12:27 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/11] Add check for bpf lsm return value Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/11] bpf, lsm: Annotate lsm hook return value range Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf, lsm: Add helper to read " Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/11] bpf, lsm: Check bpf lsm hook return values in verifier Xu Kuohai
2024-04-13 11:44 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/11] bpf, lsm: Add bpf lsm disabled hook list Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/11] bpf: Avoid progs for different hooks calling each other with tail call Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/11] bpf: Fix compare error in function retval_range_within Xu Kuohai
2024-04-12 8:53 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2024-04-12 8:53 ` [Bpf] " Shung-Hsi Yu
2024-04-25 23:41 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-04-26 8:08 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/11] bpf: Fix a false rejection caused by AND operation Xu Kuohai
2024-04-19 23:00 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-20 8:33 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-23 21:55 ` Yonghong Song
2024-04-24 2:25 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-24 22:06 ` Yonghong Song
2024-04-25 2:42 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-25 16:28 ` Yonghong Song
2024-04-26 7:43 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-26 20:36 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-04-28 15:15 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-29 20:58 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-04-29 22:18 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-30 3:56 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-30 3:54 ` Xu Kuohai
2024-04-29 21:56 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/11] selftests/bpf: Avoid load failure for token_lsm.c Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/11] selftests/bpf: Add return value checks for failed tests Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/11] selftests/bpf: Add test for lsm tail call Xu Kuohai
2024-04-11 12:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/11] selftests/bpf: Add verifier tests for bpf lsm Xu Kuohai
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAEf4BzapNjmhBYC1YsmwBFNP7rdans9X2StkQ3uQDhAyf7Py7g@mail.gmail.com \
--to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=jackmanb@chromium.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mattbobrowski@google.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=xukuohai@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.