linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: btf: restore resolve

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <a453c3d4-5615-f445-17a8-92a1dc4282e6@linux.dev>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2023 18:42:06 -0700
From:   Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
To:     Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...valent.com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: btf: restore resolve_mode when popping the
 resolve stack

On 5/17/23 2:01 AM, Lorenz Bauer wrote:
> On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 7:26 AM Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> On 5/15/23 5:15 AM, Lorenz Bauer wrote:
>>> In commit 9b459804ff99 ("btf: fix resolving BTF_KIND_VAR after ARRAY, STRUCT, UNION, PTR")
>>> I fixed a bug that occurred during resolving of a DATASEC by strategically resetting
>>> resolve_mode. This fixes the immediate bug but leaves us open to future bugs where
>>> nested types have to be resolved.
>>
>> hmm... future bugs like when adding new BTF_KIND in the future?
> 
> It could just be refactoring of the codebase? What is the downside of
> restoring the mode when popping the item? It also makes push and pop
> symmetrical.

I can see your point to refactor it to make it work for all different BTF_KIND.

Other than BTF_KIND_DATASEC, env->resolve_mode stays the same for all other 
kinds once it is decided. It is why resolve_mode is in the "env" instead of "v". 
My concern is this will hide some bugs (existing or future) that accidentally 
changed the resolve_mode in the middle. If there is another legit case that 
could be found other than BTF_KIND_DATASEC, that will be a better time to do 
this refactoring with a proper test case considering most bpf progs need btf to 
load nowadays and probably need to veristat test also. If it came to that, might 
as well consider moving resolve_mode from "env" to "v".

btf_datasec_resolve() is acting as a very top level resolver like btf_resolve(), 
so it reset env->resolve_mode before resolving its var member like how 
btf_resolve() does. imo, together with env->resolve_mode stays the same for 
others, it is more straight forward to reason. I understand that it is personal 
preference and could argue either way.