Linux-kselftest Archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
	Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@gmail.com>
Cc: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	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>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	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 07/11] bpf: Fix a false rejection caused by AND operation
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 11:56:37 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <9e49be2a-ec07-4265-a55a-45c1eb19c565@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7cf8b58011156af99816391d3afd5c52e48ea8b7.camel@gmail.com>

On 4/30/2024 6:18 AM, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-04-29 at 13:58 -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> 
> [...]
> 
>>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>>> index 8f0f2e21699e..b69c89bc5cfc 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>>> @@ -13478,6 +13478,28 @@ static void scalar32_min_max_and(struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg,
>>>                   return;
>>>           }
>>>
>>> +       /* Special case: dst_reg is in range [-1, 0] */
>>> +       if (dst_reg->s32_min_value == -1 && dst_reg->s32_max_value == 0) {
>>> +               var32_off = tnum_union(src_reg->var_off, tnum_const(0));
>>> +               dst_reg->var_off = tnum_with_subreg(dst_reg->var_off, var32_off);
>>> +               dst_reg->u32_min_value = var32_off.value;
>>> +               dst_reg->u32_max_value = min(dst_reg->u32_max_value, umax_val);
>>
>> can you explain the logic behing u32 min/max updates, especially that
>> we use completely different values for min/max and it's not clear why
>> u32_min <= u32_max invariant will always hold. Same below
> 
> I agree with Andrii here.
> It appears that dst_reg.{min,max} fields should be set as
> {min(src.min, 0), max(src.max, 0)} for both signed and unsigned cases.
> Wdyt?
>

Agree, since 0 is the minimum unsigned number, the result range is
equal to [0, src.u32_max].

>>
>>> +               dst_reg->s32_min_value = min_t(s32, src_reg->s32_min_value, 0);
>>> +               dst_reg->s32_max_value = max_t(s32, src_reg->s32_max_value, 0);
>>> +               return;
>>> +       }
>>> +
>>> +       /* Special case: src_reg is in range [-1, 0] */
>>> +       if (src_reg->s32_min_value == -1 && src_reg->s32_max_value == 0) {
>>> +               var32_off = tnum_union(dst_reg->var_off, tnum_const(0));
>>> +               dst_reg->var_off = tnum_with_subreg(dst_reg->var_off, var32_off);
>>> +               dst_reg->u32_min_value = var32_off.value;
>>> +               dst_reg->u32_max_value = min(dst_reg->u32_max_value, umax_val);
>>> +               dst_reg->s32_min_value = min_t(s32, dst_reg->s32_min_value, 0);
>>> +               dst_reg->s32_max_value = max_t(s32, dst_reg->s32_max_value, 0);
>>> +               return;
>>> +       }
>>> +
>>>           /* We get our minimum from the var_off, since that's inherently
>>>            * bitwise.  Our maximum is the minimum of the operands' maxima.
>>>            */
> 
> [...]


  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-30  3:56 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 31+ 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
2024-04-25 23:41   ` Andrii Nakryiko
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 [this message]
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=9e49be2a-ec07-4265-a55a-45c1eb19c565@huaweicloud.com \
    --to=xukuohai@huaweicloud.com \
    --cc=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=ecree.xilinx@gmail.com \
    --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=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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).