| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20171215015517.409513-3-ast@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 17:55:06 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
To: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 02/13] bpf: introduce function calls (verification)
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>
Allow arbitrary function calls from bpf function to another bpf function.
To recognize such set of bpf functions the verifier does:
1. runs control flow analysis to detect function boundaries
2. proceeds with verification of all functions starting from main(root) function
It recognizes that the stack of the caller can be accessed by the callee
(if the caller passed a pointer to its stack to the callee) and the callee
can store map_value and other pointers into the stack of the caller.
3. keeps track of the stack_depth of each function to make sure that total
stack depth is still less than 512 bytes
4. disallows pointers to the callee stack to be stored into the caller stack,
since they will be invalid as soon as the callee returns
5. to reuse all of the existing state_pruning logic each function call
is considered to be independent call from the verifier point of view.
The verifier pretends to inline all function calls it sees are being called.
It stores the callsite instruction index as part of the state to make sure
that two calls to the same callee from two different places in the caller
will be different from state pruning point of view
6. more safety checks are added to liveness analysis
Implementation details:
. struct bpf_verifier_state is now consists of all stack frames that
led to this function
. struct bpf_func_state represent one stack frame. It consists of
registers in the given frame and its stack
. propagate_liveness() logic had a premature optimization where
mark_reg_read() and mark_stack_slot_read() were manually inlined
with loop iterating over parents for each register or stack slot.
Undo this optimization to reuse more complex mark_*_read() logic
. skip_callee() logic is not necessary from safety point of view,
but without it mark_*_read() markings become too conservative,
since after returning from the funciton call a read of r6-r9
will incorrectly propagate the read marks into callee causing
inefficient pruning later
. mark_*_read() logic is now aware of control flow which makes it
more complex. In the future the plan is to rewrite liveness
to be hierarchical. So that liveness can be done within
basic block only and control flow will be responsible for
propagation of liveness information along cfg and between calls.
. tail_calls and ld_abs insns are not allowed in the programs with
bpf-to-bpf calls
. returning stack pointers to the caller or storing them into stack
frame of the caller is not allowed
Testing:
. no difference in cilium processed_insn numbers
. large number of tests follows in next patches
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
---
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 36 ++-
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 702 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
2 files changed, 585 insertions(+), 153 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index 91a583bb3fa7..1f23408024ee 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -76,6 +76,14 @@ struct bpf_reg_state {
s64 smax_value; /* maximum possible (s64)value */
u64 umin_value; /* minimum possible (u64)value */
u64 umax_value; /* maximum possible (u64)value */
+ /* Inside the callee two registers can be both PTR_TO_STACK like
+ * R1=fp-8 and R2=fp-8, but one of them points to this function stack
+ * while another to the caller's stack. To differentiate them 'frameno'
+ * is used which is an index in bpf_verifier_state->frame[] array
+ * pointing to bpf_func_state.
+ * This field must be second to last, for states_equal() reasons.
+ */
+ u32 frameno;
/* This field must be last, for states_equal() reasons. */
enum bpf_reg_liveness live;
};
@@ -96,13 +104,34 @@ struct bpf_stack_state {
/* state of the program:
* type of all registers and stack info
*/
-struct bpf_verifier_state {
+struct bpf_func_state {
struct bpf_reg_state regs[MAX_BPF_REG];
struct bpf_verifier_state *parent;
+ /* index of call instruction that called into this func */
+ int callsite;
+ /* stack frame number of this function state from pov of
+ * enclosing bpf_verifier_state.
+ * 0 = main function, 1 = first callee.
+ */
+ u32 frameno;
+ /* subprog number == index within subprog_stack_depth
+ * zero == main subprog
+ */
+ u32 subprogno;
+
+ /* should be second to last. See copy_func_state() */
int allocated_stack;
struct bpf_stack_state *stack;
};
+#define MAX_CALL_FRAMES 8
+struct bpf_verifier_state {
+ /* call stack tracking */
+ struct bpf_func_state *frame[MAX_CALL_FRAMES];
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *parent;
+ u32 curframe;
+};
+
/* linked list of verifier states used to prune search */
struct bpf_verifier_state_list {
struct bpf_verifier_state state;
@@ -163,12 +192,15 @@ struct bpf_verifier_env {
struct bpf_insn_aux_data *insn_aux_data; /* array of per-insn state */
struct bpf_verifer_log log;
u32 subprog_starts[BPF_MAX_SUBPROGS];
+ u16 subprog_stack_depth[BPF_MAX_SUBPROGS + 1];
u32 subprog_cnt;
};
static inline struct bpf_reg_state *cur_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
- return env->cur_state->regs;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state;
+
+ return cur->frame[cur->curframe]->regs;
}
#if defined(CONFIG_NET) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 1d0f7ff0b9a9..f6e09d84a96f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -229,13 +229,23 @@ static void print_liveness(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
verbose(env, "w");
}
+static struct bpf_func_state *func(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
+{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state;
+
+ return cur->frame[reg->frameno];
+}
+
static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state)
+ const struct bpf_func_state *state)
{
- struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
+ const struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
enum bpf_reg_type t;
int i;
+ if (state->frameno)
+ verbose(env, " frame%d:", state->frameno);
for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++) {
reg = &state->regs[i];
t = reg->type;
@@ -248,6 +258,8 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
/* reg->off should be 0 for SCALAR_VALUE */
verbose(env, "%lld", reg->var_off.value + reg->off);
+ if (t == PTR_TO_STACK)
+ verbose(env, ",call_%d", func(env, reg)->callsite);
} else {
verbose(env, "(id=%d", reg->id);
if (t != SCALAR_VALUE)
@@ -303,8 +315,8 @@ static void print_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
verbose(env, "\n");
}
-static int copy_stack_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *dst,
- const struct bpf_verifier_state *src)
+static int copy_stack_state(struct bpf_func_state *dst,
+ const struct bpf_func_state *src)
{
if (!src->stack)
return 0;
@@ -320,13 +332,13 @@ static int copy_stack_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *dst,
/* do_check() starts with zero-sized stack in struct bpf_verifier_state to
* make it consume minimal amount of memory. check_stack_write() access from
- * the program calls into realloc_verifier_state() to grow the stack size.
+ * the program calls into realloc_func_state() to grow the stack size.
* Note there is a non-zero 'parent' pointer inside bpf_verifier_state
* which this function copies over. It points to previous bpf_verifier_state
* which is never reallocated
*/
-static int realloc_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int size,
- bool copy_old)
+static int realloc_func_state(struct bpf_func_state *state, int size,
+ bool copy_old)
{
u32 old_size = state->allocated_stack;
struct bpf_stack_state *new_stack;
@@ -359,10 +371,21 @@ static int realloc_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int size,
return 0;
}
+static void free_func_state(struct bpf_func_state *state)
+{
+ kfree(state->stack);
+ kfree(state);
+}
+
static void free_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
bool free_self)
{
- kfree(state->stack);
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i <= state->curframe; i++) {
+ free_func_state(state->frame[i]);
+ state->frame[i] = NULL;
+ }
if (free_self)
kfree(state);
}
@@ -370,18 +393,46 @@ static void free_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
/* copy verifier state from src to dst growing dst stack space
* when necessary to accommodate larger src stack
*/
-static int copy_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *dst,
- const struct bpf_verifier_state *src)
+static int copy_func_state(struct bpf_func_state *dst,
+ const struct bpf_func_state *src)
{
int err;
- err = realloc_verifier_state(dst, src->allocated_stack, false);
+ err = realloc_func_state(dst, src->allocated_stack, false);
if (err)
return err;
- memcpy(dst, src, offsetof(struct bpf_verifier_state, allocated_stack));
+ memcpy(dst, src, offsetof(struct bpf_func_state, allocated_stack));
return copy_stack_state(dst, src);
}
+static int copy_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *dst_state,
+ const struct bpf_verifier_state *src)
+{
+ struct bpf_func_state *dst;
+ int i, err;
+
+ /* if dst has more stack frames then src frame, free them */
+ for (i = src->curframe + 1; i <= dst_state->curframe; i++) {
+ free_func_state(dst_state->frame[i]);
+ dst_state->frame[i] = NULL;
+ }
+ dst_state->curframe = src->curframe;
+ dst_state->parent = src->parent;
+ for (i = 0; i <= src->curframe; i++) {
+ dst = dst_state->frame[i];
+ if (!dst) {
+ dst = kzalloc(sizeof(*dst), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!dst)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ dst_state->frame[i] = dst;
+ }
+ err = copy_func_state(dst, src->frame[i]);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
static int pop_stack(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int *prev_insn_idx,
int *insn_idx)
{
@@ -443,6 +494,10 @@ static struct bpf_verifier_state *push_stack(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
static const int caller_saved[CALLER_SAVED_REGS] = {
BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5
};
+#define CALLEE_SAVED_REGS 5
+static const int callee_saved[CALLEE_SAVED_REGS] = {
+ BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_9
+};
static void __mark_reg_not_init(struct bpf_reg_state *reg);
@@ -578,6 +633,7 @@ static void __mark_reg_unknown(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
reg->id = 0;
reg->off = 0;
reg->var_off = tnum_unknown;
+ reg->frameno = 0;
__mark_reg_unbounded(reg);
}
@@ -614,8 +670,9 @@ static void mark_reg_not_init(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
}
static void init_reg_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs)
+ struct bpf_func_state *state)
{
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++) {
@@ -626,12 +683,24 @@ static void init_reg_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
/* frame pointer */
regs[BPF_REG_FP].type = PTR_TO_STACK;
mark_reg_known_zero(env, regs, BPF_REG_FP);
+ regs[BPF_REG_FP].frameno = state->frameno;
/* 1st arg to a function */
regs[BPF_REG_1].type = PTR_TO_CTX;
mark_reg_known_zero(env, regs, BPF_REG_1);
}
+#define BPF_MAIN_FUNC (-1)
+static void init_func_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ struct bpf_func_state *state,
+ int callsite, int frameno, int subprogno)
+{
+ state->callsite = callsite;
+ state->frameno = frameno;
+ state->subprogno = subprogno;
+ init_reg_state(env, state);
+}
+
enum reg_arg_type {
SRC_OP, /* register is used as source operand */
DST_OP, /* register is used as destination operand */
@@ -745,29 +814,86 @@ static int check_subprogs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
return 0;
}
-static void mark_reg_read(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state, u32 regno)
+struct bpf_verifier_state *skip_callee(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *parent,
+ u32 regno)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *parent = state->parent;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *tmp = NULL;
+
+ /* 'parent' could be a state of caller and
+ * 'state' could be a state of callee. In such case
+ * parent->curframe < state->curframe
+ * and it's ok for r1 - r5 registers
+ *
+ * 'parent' could be a callee's state after it bpf_exit-ed.
+ * In such case parent->curframe > state->curframe
+ * and it's ok for r0 only
+ */
+ if (parent->curframe == state->curframe ||
+ (parent->curframe < state->curframe &&
+ regno >= BPF_REG_1 && regno <= BPF_REG_5) ||
+ (parent->curframe > state->curframe &&
+ regno == BPF_REG_0))
+ return parent;
+
+ if (parent->curframe > state->curframe &&
+ regno >= BPF_REG_6) {
+ /* for callee saved regs we have to skip the whole chain
+ * of states that belong to callee and mark as LIVE_READ
+ * the registers before the call
+ */
+ tmp = parent;
+ while (tmp && tmp->curframe != state->curframe) {
+ tmp = tmp->parent;
+ }
+ if (!tmp)
+ goto bug;
+ parent = tmp;
+ } else {
+ goto bug;
+ }
+ return parent;
+bug:
+ verbose(env, "verifier bug regno %d tmp %p\n", regno, tmp);
+ verbose(env, "regno %d parent frame %d current frame %d\n",
+ regno, parent->curframe, state->curframe);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int mark_reg_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *parent,
+ u32 regno)
+{
+ bool writes = parent == state->parent; /* Observe write marks */
if (regno == BPF_REG_FP)
/* We don't need to worry about FP liveness because it's read-only */
- return;
+ return 0;
while (parent) {
/* if read wasn't screened by an earlier write ... */
- if (state->regs[regno].live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN)
+ if (writes && state->frame[state->curframe]->regs[regno].live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN)
break;
+ parent = skip_callee(env, state, parent, regno);
+ if (!parent)
+ return -EFAULT;
/* ... then we depend on parent's value */
- parent->regs[regno].live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
+ parent->frame[parent->curframe]->regs[regno].live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
state = parent;
parent = state->parent;
+ writes = true;
}
+ return 0;
}
static int check_reg_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno,
enum reg_arg_type t)
{
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = env->cur_state->regs;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs;
if (regno >= MAX_BPF_REG) {
verbose(env, "R%d is invalid\n", regno);
@@ -780,7 +906,7 @@ static int check_reg_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno,
verbose(env, "R%d !read_ok\n", regno);
return -EACCES;
}
- mark_reg_read(env->cur_state, regno);
+ return mark_reg_read(env, vstate, vstate->parent, regno);
} else {
/* check whether register used as dest operand can be written to */
if (regno == BPF_REG_FP) {
@@ -815,13 +941,15 @@ static bool is_spillable_regtype(enum bpf_reg_type type)
* stack boundary and alignment are checked in check_mem_access()
*/
static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int off,
- int size, int value_regno)
+ struct bpf_func_state *state, /* func where register points to */
+ int off, int size, int value_regno)
{
+ struct bpf_func_state *cur; /* state of the current function */
int i, slot = -off - 1, spi = slot / BPF_REG_SIZE, err;
+ enum bpf_reg_type type;
- err = realloc_verifier_state(state, round_up(slot + 1, BPF_REG_SIZE),
- true);
+ err = realloc_func_state(state, round_up(slot + 1, BPF_REG_SIZE),
+ true);
if (err)
return err;
/* caller checked that off % size == 0 and -MAX_BPF_STACK <= off < 0,
@@ -834,8 +962,9 @@ static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return -EACCES;
}
+ cur = env->cur_state->frame[env->cur_state->curframe];
if (value_regno >= 0 &&
- is_spillable_regtype(state->regs[value_regno].type)) {
+ is_spillable_regtype((type = cur->regs[value_regno].type))) {
/* register containing pointer is being spilled into stack */
if (size != BPF_REG_SIZE) {
@@ -843,8 +972,13 @@ static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return -EACCES;
}
+ if (state != cur && type == PTR_TO_STACK) {
+ verbose(env, "cannot spill pointers to stack into stack frame of the caller\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
/* save register state */
- state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr = state->regs[value_regno];
+ state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr = cur->regs[value_regno];
state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_WRITTEN;
for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_SIZE; i++)
@@ -860,34 +994,68 @@ static int check_stack_write(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return 0;
}
-static void mark_stack_slot_read(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int slot)
+/* registers of every function are unique and mark_reg_read() propagates
+ * the liveness in the following cases:
+ * - from callee into caller for R1 - R5 that were used as arguments
+ * - from caller into callee for R0 that used as result of the call
+ * - from caller to the same caller skipping states of the callee for R6 - R9,
+ * since R6 - R9 are callee saved by implicit function prologue and
+ * caller's R6 != callee's R6, so when we propagate liveness up to
+ * parent states we need to skip callee states for R6 - R9.
+ *
+ * stack slot marking is different, since stacks of caller and callee are
+ * accessible in both (since caller can pass a pointer to caller's stack to
+ * callee which can pass it to another function), hence mark_stack_slot_read()
+ * has to propagate the stack liveness to all parent states at given frame number.
+ * Consider code:
+ * f1() {
+ * ptr = fp - 8;
+ * *ptr = ctx;
+ * call f2 {
+ * .. = *ptr;
+ * }
+ * .. = *ptr;
+ * }
+ * First *ptr is reading from f1's stack and mark_stack_slot_read() has
+ * to mark liveness at the f1's frame and not f2's frame.
+ * Second *ptr is also reading from f1's stack and mark_stack_slot_read() has
+ * to propagate liveness to f2 states at f1's frame level and further into
+ * f1 states at f1's frame level until write into that stack slot
+ */
+static void mark_stack_slot_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *parent,
+ int slot, int frameno)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *parent = state->parent;
+ bool writes = parent == state->parent; /* Observe write marks */
while (parent) {
/* if read wasn't screened by an earlier write ... */
- if (state->stack[slot].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN)
+ if (writes && state->frame[frameno]->stack[slot].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN)
break;
/* ... then we depend on parent's value */
- parent->stack[slot].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
+ parent->frame[frameno]->stack[slot].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
state = parent;
parent = state->parent;
+ writes = true;
}
}
static int check_stack_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int off, int size,
- int value_regno)
+ struct bpf_func_state *reg_state /* func where register points to */,
+ int off, int size, int value_regno)
{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
int i, slot = -off - 1, spi = slot / BPF_REG_SIZE;
u8 *stype;
- if (state->allocated_stack <= slot) {
+ if (reg_state->allocated_stack <= slot) {
verbose(env, "invalid read from stack off %d+0 size %d\n",
off, size);
return -EACCES;
}
- stype = state->stack[spi].slot_type;
+ stype = reg_state->stack[spi].slot_type;
if (stype[0] == STACK_SPILL) {
if (size != BPF_REG_SIZE) {
@@ -903,13 +1071,14 @@ static int check_stack_read(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
if (value_regno >= 0) {
/* restore register state from stack */
- state->regs[value_regno] = state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr;
+ state->regs[value_regno] = reg_state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr;
/* mark reg as written since spilled pointer state likely
* has its liveness marks cleared by is_state_visited()
* which resets stack/reg liveness for state transitions
*/
state->regs[value_regno].live |= REG_LIVE_WRITTEN;
- mark_stack_slot_read(state, spi);
+ mark_stack_slot_read(env, vstate, vstate->parent, spi,
+ reg_state->frameno);
}
return 0;
} else {
@@ -947,7 +1116,8 @@ static int __check_map_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno, int off,
static int check_map_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno,
int off, int size, bool zero_size_allowed)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
struct bpf_reg_state *reg = &state->regs[regno];
int err;
@@ -1197,6 +1367,39 @@ static int check_ptr_alignment(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
strict);
}
+static int update_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_func_state *func,
+ int off)
+{
+ u16 stack = env->subprog_stack_depth[func->subprogno], total = 0;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state;
+ int i;
+
+ if (stack >= -off)
+ return 0;
+
+ /* update known max for given subprogram */
+ env->subprog_stack_depth[func->subprogno] = -off;
+
+ /* compute the total for current call chain */
+ for (i = 0; i <= cur->curframe; i++) {
+ u32 depth = env->subprog_stack_depth[cur->frame[i]->subprogno];
+
+ /* round up to 32-bytes, since this is granularity
+ * of interpreter stack sizes
+ */
+ depth = round_up(depth, 32);
+ total += depth;
+ }
+
+ if (total > MAX_BPF_STACK) {
+ verbose(env, "combined stack size of %d calls is %d. Too large\n",
+ cur->curframe, total);
+ return -EACCES;
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
/* check whether memory at (regno + off) is accessible for t = (read | write)
* if t==write, value_regno is a register which value is stored into memory
* if t==read, value_regno is a register which will receive the value from memory
@@ -1207,9 +1410,9 @@ static int check_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, u32 regn
int bpf_size, enum bpf_access_type t,
int value_regno)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env);
struct bpf_reg_state *reg = regs + regno;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state;
int size, err = 0;
size = bpf_size_to_bytes(bpf_size);
@@ -1298,8 +1501,10 @@ static int check_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, u32 regn
return -EACCES;
}
- if (env->prog->aux->stack_depth < -off)
- env->prog->aux->stack_depth = -off;
+ state = func(env, reg);
+ err = update_stack_depth(env, state, off);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
if (t == BPF_WRITE)
err = check_stack_write(env, state, off, size,
@@ -1390,7 +1595,7 @@ static int check_stack_boundary(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
struct bpf_call_arg_meta *meta)
{
struct bpf_reg_state *reg = cur_regs(env) + regno;
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
int off, i, slot, spi;
if (reg->type != PTR_TO_STACK) {
@@ -1421,9 +1626,6 @@ static int check_stack_boundary(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
return -EACCES;
}
- if (env->prog->aux->stack_depth < -off)
- env->prog->aux->stack_depth = -off;
-
if (meta && meta->raw_mode) {
meta->access_size = access_size;
meta->regno = regno;
@@ -1441,7 +1643,7 @@ static int check_stack_boundary(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
return -EACCES;
}
}
- return 0;
+ return update_stack_depth(env, state, off);
}
static int check_helper_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
@@ -1694,6 +1896,10 @@ static int check_map_func_compatibility(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
case BPF_FUNC_tail_call:
if (map->map_type != BPF_MAP_TYPE_PROG_ARRAY)
goto error;
+ if (env->subprog_cnt) {
+ verbose(env, "tail_calls are not allowed in programs with bpf-to-bpf calls\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
break;
case BPF_FUNC_perf_event_read:
case BPF_FUNC_perf_event_output:
@@ -1755,9 +1961,9 @@ static int check_raw_mode(const struct bpf_func_proto *fn)
/* Packet data might have moved, any old PTR_TO_PACKET[_META,_END]
* are now invalid, so turn them into unknown SCALAR_VALUE.
*/
-static void clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+static void __clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ struct bpf_func_state *state)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
int i;
@@ -1774,7 +1980,121 @@ static void clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
}
}
-static int check_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int func_id, int insn_idx)
+static void clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++)
+ __clear_all_pkt_pointers(env, vstate->frame[i]);
+}
+
+static int check_func_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
+ int *insn_idx)
+{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *caller, *callee;
+ int i, subprog, target_insn;
+
+ if (state->curframe >= MAX_CALL_FRAMES) {
+ verbose(env, "the call stack of %d frames is too deep\n",
+ state->curframe);
+ return -E2BIG;
+ }
+
+ target_insn = *insn_idx + insn->imm;
+ subprog = find_subprog(env, target_insn + 1);
+ if (subprog < 0) {
+ verbose(env, "verifier bug. No program starts at insn %d\n",
+ target_insn + 1);
+ return -EFAULT;
+ }
+
+ caller = state->frame[state->curframe];
+ if (state->frame[state->curframe + 1]) {
+ verbose(env, "verifier bug. Frame %d already allocated\n",
+ state->curframe + 1);
+ return -EFAULT;
+ }
+
+ callee = kzalloc(sizeof(*callee), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!callee)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ state->frame[state->curframe + 1] = callee;
+
+ /* callee cannot access r0, r6 - r9 for reading and has to write
+ * into its own stack before reading from it.
+ * callee can read/write into caller's stack
+ */
+ init_func_state(env, callee,
+ /* remember the callsite, it will be used by bpf_exit */
+ *insn_idx /* callsite */,
+ state->curframe + 1 /* frameno within this callchain */,
+ subprog + 1 /* subprog number within this prog */);
+
+ /* copy r1 - r5 args that callee can access */
+ for (i = BPF_REG_1; i <= BPF_REG_5; i++)
+ callee->regs[i] = caller->regs[i];
+
+ /* after the call regsiters r0 - r5 were scratched */
+ for (i = 0; i < CALLER_SAVED_REGS; i++) {
+ mark_reg_not_init(env, caller->regs, caller_saved[i]);
+ check_reg_arg(env, caller_saved[i], DST_OP_NO_MARK);
+ }
+
+ /* only increment it after check_reg_arg() finished */
+ state->curframe++;
+
+ /* and go analyze first insn of the callee */
+ *insn_idx = target_insn;
+
+ if (env->log.level) {
+ verbose(env, "caller:\n");
+ print_verifier_state(env, caller);
+ verbose(env, "callee:\n");
+ print_verifier_state(env, callee);
+ }
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int prepare_func_exit(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int *insn_idx)
+{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *caller, *callee;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *r0;
+
+ callee = state->frame[state->curframe];
+ r0 = &callee->regs[BPF_REG_0];
+ if (r0->type == PTR_TO_STACK) {
+ /* technically it's ok to return caller's stack pointer
+ * (or caller's caller's pointer) back to the caller,
+ * since these pointers are valid. Only current stack
+ * pointer will be invalid as soon as function exits,
+ * but let's be conservative
+ */
+ verbose(env, "cannot return stack pointer to the caller\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
+ state->curframe--;
+ caller = state->frame[state->curframe];
+ /* return to the caller whatever r0 had in the callee */
+ caller->regs[BPF_REG_0] = *r0;
+
+ *insn_idx = callee->callsite + 1;
+ if (env->log.level) {
+ verbose(env, "returning from callee:\n");
+ print_verifier_state(env, callee);
+ verbose(env, "to caller at %d:\n", *insn_idx);
+ print_verifier_state(env, caller);
+ }
+ /* clear everything in the callee */
+ free_func_state(callee);
+ state->frame[state->curframe + 1] = NULL;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int func_id, int insn_idx)
{
const struct bpf_func_proto *fn = NULL;
struct bpf_reg_state *regs;
@@ -1934,7 +2254,9 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const struct bpf_reg_state *ptr_reg,
const struct bpf_reg_state *off_reg)
{
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env), *dst_reg;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *dst_reg;
bool known = tnum_is_const(off_reg->var_off);
s64 smin_val = off_reg->smin_value, smax_val = off_reg->smax_value,
smin_ptr = ptr_reg->smin_value, smax_ptr = ptr_reg->smax_value;
@@ -1946,13 +2268,13 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
dst_reg = ®s[dst];
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(known && (smin_val != smax_val))) {
- print_verifier_state(env, env->cur_state);
+ print_verifier_state(env, state);
verbose(env,
"verifier internal error: known but bad sbounds\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(known && (umin_val != umax_val))) {
- print_verifier_state(env, env->cur_state);
+ print_verifier_state(env, state);
verbose(env,
"verifier internal error: known but bad ubounds\n");
return -EINVAL;
@@ -2354,7 +2676,9 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_insn *insn)
{
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env), *dst_reg, *src_reg;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *dst_reg, *src_reg;
struct bpf_reg_state *ptr_reg = NULL, off_reg = {0};
u8 opcode = BPF_OP(insn->code);
int rc;
@@ -2428,12 +2752,12 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
/* Got here implies adding two SCALAR_VALUEs */
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ptr_reg)) {
- print_verifier_state(env, env->cur_state);
+ print_verifier_state(env, state);
verbose(env, "verifier internal error: unexpected ptr_reg\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
if (WARN_ON(!src_reg)) {
- print_verifier_state(env, env->cur_state);
+ print_verifier_state(env, state);
verbose(env, "verifier internal error: no src_reg\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
@@ -2587,14 +2911,15 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return 0;
}
-static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
+static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg,
enum bpf_reg_type type,
bool range_right_open)
{
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
u16 new_range;
- int i;
+ int i, j;
if (dst_reg->off < 0 ||
(dst_reg->off == 0 && range_right_open))
@@ -2664,12 +2989,15 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
/* keep the maximum range already checked */
regs[i].range = max(regs[i].range, new_range);
- for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
- if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
- continue;
- reg = &state->stack[i].spilled_ptr;
- if (reg->type == type && reg->id == dst_reg->id)
- reg->range = max(reg->range, new_range);
+ for (j = 0; j <= vstate->curframe; j++) {
+ state = vstate->frame[j];
+ for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
+ if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
+ continue;
+ reg = &state->stack[i].spilled_ptr;
+ if (reg->type == type && reg->id == dst_reg->id)
+ reg->range = max(reg->range, new_range);
+ }
}
}
@@ -2907,20 +3235,24 @@ static void mark_map_reg(struct bpf_reg_state *regs, u32 regno, u32 id,
/* The logic is similar to find_good_pkt_pointers(), both could eventually
* be folded together at some point.
*/
-static void mark_map_regs(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, u32 regno,
+static void mark_map_regs(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate, u32 regno,
bool is_null)
{
+ struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs;
u32 id = regs[regno].id;
- int i;
+ int i, j;
for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++)
mark_map_reg(regs, i, id, is_null);
- for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
- if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
- continue;
- mark_map_reg(&state->stack[i].spilled_ptr, 0, id, is_null);
+ for (j = 0; j <= vstate->curframe; j++) {
+ state = vstate->frame[j];
+ for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
+ if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
+ continue;
+ mark_map_reg(&state->stack[i].spilled_ptr, 0, id, is_null);
+ }
}
}
@@ -3020,8 +3352,10 @@ static bool try_match_pkt_pointers(const struct bpf_insn *insn,
static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_insn *insn, int *insn_idx)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *other_branch, *this_branch = env->cur_state;
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = this_branch->regs, *dst_reg;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *this_branch = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *other_branch;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = this_branch->frame[this_branch->curframe]->regs;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg, *other_branch_regs;
u8 opcode = BPF_OP(insn->code);
int err;
@@ -3084,6 +3418,7 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
other_branch = push_stack(env, *insn_idx + insn->off + 1, *insn_idx);
if (!other_branch)
return -EFAULT;
+ other_branch_regs = other_branch->frame[other_branch->curframe]->regs;
/* detect if we are comparing against a constant value so we can adjust
* our min/max values for our dst register.
@@ -3096,22 +3431,22 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
if (dst_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE &&
regs[insn->src_reg].type == SCALAR_VALUE) {
if (tnum_is_const(regs[insn->src_reg].var_off))
- reg_set_min_max(&other_branch->regs[insn->dst_reg],
+ reg_set_min_max(&other_branch_regs[insn->dst_reg],
dst_reg, regs[insn->src_reg].var_off.value,
opcode);
else if (tnum_is_const(dst_reg->var_off))
- reg_set_min_max_inv(&other_branch->regs[insn->src_reg],
+ reg_set_min_max_inv(&other_branch_regs[insn->src_reg],
®s[insn->src_reg],
dst_reg->var_off.value, opcode);
else if (opcode == BPF_JEQ || opcode == BPF_JNE)
/* Comparing for equality, we can combine knowledge */
- reg_combine_min_max(&other_branch->regs[insn->src_reg],
- &other_branch->regs[insn->dst_reg],
+ reg_combine_min_max(&other_branch_regs[insn->src_reg],
+ &other_branch_regs[insn->dst_reg],
®s[insn->src_reg],
®s[insn->dst_reg], opcode);
}
} else if (dst_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE) {
- reg_set_min_max(&other_branch->regs[insn->dst_reg],
+ reg_set_min_max(&other_branch_regs[insn->dst_reg],
dst_reg, insn->imm, opcode);
}
@@ -3132,7 +3467,7 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return -EACCES;
}
if (env->log.level)
- print_verifier_state(env, this_branch);
+ print_verifier_state(env, this_branch->frame[this_branch->curframe]);
return 0;
}
@@ -3217,6 +3552,18 @@ static int check_ld_abs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (env->subprog_cnt) {
+ /* when program has LD_ABS insn JITs and interpreter assume
+ * that r1 == ctx == skb which is not the case for callees
+ * that can have arbitrary arguments. It's problematic
+ * for main prog as well since JITs would need to analyze
+ * all functions in order to make proper register save/restore
+ * decisions in the main prog. Hence disallow LD_ABS with calls
+ */
+ verbose(env, "BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] instructions cannot be mixed with bpf-to-bpf calls\n");
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+
if (insn->dst_reg != BPF_REG_0 || insn->off != 0 ||
BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_DW ||
(mode == BPF_ABS && insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0)) {
@@ -3555,11 +3902,21 @@ static bool check_ids(u32 old_id, u32 cur_id, struct idpair *idmap)
static bool regsafe(struct bpf_reg_state *rold, struct bpf_reg_state *rcur,
struct idpair *idmap)
{
+ bool equal;
+
if (!(rold->live & REG_LIVE_READ))
/* explored state didn't use this */
return true;
- if (memcmp(rold, rcur, offsetof(struct bpf_reg_state, live)) == 0)
+ equal = memcmp(rold, rcur, offsetof(struct bpf_reg_state, frameno)) == 0;
+
+ if (rold->type == PTR_TO_STACK)
+ /* two stack pointers are equal only if they're pointing to
+ * the same stack frame, since fp-8 in foo != fp-8 in bar
+ */
+ return equal && rold->frameno == rcur->frameno;
+
+ if (equal)
return true;
if (rold->type == NOT_INIT)
@@ -3632,7 +3989,6 @@ static bool regsafe(struct bpf_reg_state *rold, struct bpf_reg_state *rcur,
tnum_in(rold->var_off, rcur->var_off);
case PTR_TO_CTX:
case CONST_PTR_TO_MAP:
- case PTR_TO_STACK:
case PTR_TO_PACKET_END:
/* Only valid matches are exact, which memcmp() above
* would have accepted
@@ -3647,8 +4003,8 @@ static bool regsafe(struct bpf_reg_state *rold, struct bpf_reg_state *rcur,
return false;
}
-static bool stacksafe(struct bpf_verifier_state *old,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *cur,
+static bool stacksafe(struct bpf_func_state *old,
+ struct bpf_func_state *cur,
struct idpair *idmap)
{
int i, spi;
@@ -3724,9 +4080,8 @@ static bool stacksafe(struct bpf_verifier_state *old,
* whereas register type in current state is meaningful, it means that
* the current state will reach 'bpf_exit' instruction safely
*/
-static bool states_equal(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *old,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *cur)
+static bool func_states_equal(struct bpf_func_state *old,
+ struct bpf_func_state *cur)
{
struct idpair *idmap;
bool ret = false;
@@ -3750,71 +4105,76 @@ static bool states_equal(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return ret;
}
+static bool states_equal(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *old,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *cur)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ if (old->curframe != cur->curframe)
+ return false;
+
+ /* for states to be equal callsites have to be the same
+ * and all frame states need to be equivalent
+ */
+ for (i = 0; i <= old->curframe; i++) {
+ if (old->frame[i]->callsite != cur->frame[i]->callsite)
+ return false;
+ if (!func_states_equal(old->frame[i], cur->frame[i]))
+ return false;
+ }
+ return true;
+}
+
/* A write screens off any subsequent reads; but write marks come from the
- * straight-line code between a state and its parent. When we arrive at a
- * jump target (in the first iteration of the propagate_liveness() loop),
- * we didn't arrive by the straight-line code, so read marks in state must
- * propagate to parent regardless of state's write marks.
+ * straight-line code between a state and its parent. When we arrive at an
+ * equivalent state (jump target or such) we didn't arrive by the straight-line
+ * code, so read marks in the state must propagate to the parent regardless
+ * of the state's write marks. That's what 'parent == state->parent' comparison
+ * in mark_reg_read() and mark_stack_slot_read() is for.
*/
-static bool do_propagate_liveness(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *parent)
+static int propagate_liveness(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *vparent)
{
- bool writes = parent == state->parent; /* Observe write marks */
- bool touched = false; /* any changes made? */
- int i;
+ int i, frame, err = 0;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state, *parent;
- if (!parent)
- return touched;
+ if (vparent->curframe != vstate->curframe) {
+ WARN(1, "propagate_live: parent frame %d current frame %d\n",
+ vparent->curframe, vstate->curframe);
+ return -EFAULT;
+ }
/* Propagate read liveness of registers... */
BUILD_BUG_ON(BPF_REG_FP + 1 != MAX_BPF_REG);
/* We don't need to worry about FP liveness because it's read-only */
for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_FP; i++) {
- if (parent->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ)
+ if (vparent->frame[vparent->curframe]->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ)
continue;
- if (writes && (state->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN))
- continue;
- if (state->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ) {
- parent->regs[i].live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
- touched = true;
+ if (vstate->frame[vstate->curframe]->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ) {
+ err = mark_reg_read(env, vstate, vparent, i);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
}
}
+
/* ... and stack slots */
- for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE &&
- i < parent->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
- if (parent->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
- continue;
- if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
- continue;
- if (parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ)
- continue;
- if (writes &&
- (state->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_WRITTEN))
- continue;
- if (state->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ) {
- parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live |= REG_LIVE_READ;
- touched = true;
+ for (frame = 0; frame <= vstate->curframe; frame++) {
+ state = vstate->frame[frame];
+ parent = vparent->frame[frame];
+ for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE &&
+ i < parent->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
+ if (parent->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
+ continue;
+ if (state->stack[i].slot_type[0] != STACK_SPILL)
+ continue;
+ if (parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ)
+ continue;
+ if (state->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ)
+ mark_stack_slot_read(env, vstate, vparent, i, frame);
}
}
- return touched;
-}
-
-/* "parent" is "a state from which we reach the current state", but initially
- * it is not the state->parent (i.e. "the state whose straight-line code leads
- * to the current state"), instead it is the state that happened to arrive at
- * a (prunable) equivalent of the current state. See comment above
- * do_propagate_liveness() for consequences of this.
- * This function is just a more efficient way of calling mark_reg_read() or
- * mark_stack_slot_read() on each reg in "parent" that is read in "state",
- * though it requires that parent != state->parent in the call arguments.
- */
-static void propagate_liveness(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state,
- struct bpf_verifier_state *parent)
-{
- while (do_propagate_liveness(state, parent)) {
- /* Something changed, so we need to feed those changes onward */
- state = parent;
- parent = state->parent;
- }
+ return err;
}
static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
@@ -3822,7 +4182,7 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
struct bpf_verifier_state_list *new_sl;
struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl;
struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state;
- int i, err;
+ int i, j, err;
sl = env->explored_states[insn_idx];
if (!sl)
@@ -3843,7 +4203,9 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
* they'll be immediately forgotten as we're pruning
* this state and will pop a new one.
*/
- propagate_liveness(&sl->state, cur);
+ err = propagate_liveness(env, &sl->state, cur);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
return 1;
}
sl = sl->next;
@@ -3851,9 +4213,10 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
/* there were no equivalent states, remember current one.
* technically the current state is not proven to be safe yet,
- * but it will either reach bpf_exit (which means it's safe) or
- * it will be rejected. Since there are no loops, we won't be
- * seeing this 'insn_idx' instruction again on the way to bpf_exit
+ * but it will either reach outer most bpf_exit (which means it's safe)
+ * or it will be rejected. Since there are no loops, we won't be
+ * seeing this tuple (frame[0].callsite, frame[1].callsite, .. insn_idx)
+ * again on the way to bpf_exit
*/
new_sl = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_verifier_state_list), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!new_sl)
@@ -3877,10 +4240,16 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
* explored_states can get read marks.)
*/
for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_FP; i++)
- cur->regs[i].live = REG_LIVE_NONE;
- for (i = 0; i < cur->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++)
- if (cur->stack[i].slot_type[0] == STACK_SPILL)
- cur->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live = REG_LIVE_NONE;
+ cur->frame[cur->curframe]->regs[i].live = REG_LIVE_NONE;
+
+ /* all stack frames are accessible from callee, clear them all */
+ for (j = 0; j <= cur->curframe; j++) {
+ struct bpf_func_state *frame = cur->frame[j];
+
+ for (i = 0; i < frame->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++)
+ if (frame->stack[i].slot_type[0] == STACK_SPILL)
+ frame->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live = REG_LIVE_NONE;
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -3898,7 +4267,7 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
struct bpf_verifier_state *state;
struct bpf_insn *insns = env->prog->insnsi;
struct bpf_reg_state *regs;
- int insn_cnt = env->prog->len;
+ int insn_cnt = env->prog->len, i;
int insn_idx, prev_insn_idx = 0;
int insn_processed = 0;
bool do_print_state = false;
@@ -3906,9 +4275,18 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
state = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_verifier_state), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!state)
return -ENOMEM;
- env->cur_state = state;
- init_reg_state(env, state->regs);
+ state->curframe = 0;
state->parent = NULL;
+ state->frame[0] = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_func_state), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!state->frame[0]) {
+ kfree(state);
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ }
+ env->cur_state = state;
+ init_func_state(env, state->frame[0],
+ BPF_MAIN_FUNC /* callsite */,
+ 0 /* frameno */,
+ 0 /* subprogno, zero == main subprog */);
insn_idx = 0;
for (;;) {
struct bpf_insn *insn;
@@ -3955,7 +4333,7 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
else
verbose(env, "\nfrom %d to %d:",
prev_insn_idx, insn_idx);
- print_verifier_state(env, state);
+ print_verifier_state(env, state->frame[state->curframe]);
do_print_state = false;
}
@@ -4088,13 +4466,17 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
if (opcode == BPF_CALL) {
if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) != BPF_K ||
insn->off != 0 ||
- insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0 ||
+ (insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0 &&
+ insn->src_reg != BPF_PSEUDO_CALL) ||
insn->dst_reg != BPF_REG_0) {
verbose(env, "BPF_CALL uses reserved fields\n");
return -EINVAL;
}
- err = check_call(env, insn->imm, insn_idx);
+ if (insn->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_CALL)
+ err = check_func_call(env, insn, &insn_idx);
+ else
+ err = check_helper_call(env, insn->imm, insn_idx);
if (err)
return err;
@@ -4119,6 +4501,16 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
return -EINVAL;
}
+ if (state->curframe) {
+ /* exit from nested function */
+ prev_insn_idx = insn_idx;
+ err = prepare_func_exit(env, &insn_idx);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+ do_print_state = true;
+ continue;
+ }
+
/* eBPF calling convetion is such that R0 is used
* to return the value from eBPF program.
* Make sure that it's readable at this time
@@ -4179,8 +4571,16 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
insn_idx++;
}
- verbose(env, "processed %d insns, stack depth %d\n", insn_processed,
- env->prog->aux->stack_depth);
+ verbose(env, "processed %d insns, stack depth ", insn_processed);
+ for (i = 0; i < env->subprog_cnt + 1; i++) {
+ u32 depth = env->subprog_stack_depth[i];
+
+ verbose(env, "%d", depth);
+ if (i + 1 < env->subprog_cnt + 1)
+ verbose(env, "+");
+ }
+ verbose(env, "\n");
+ env->prog->aux->stack_depth = env->subprog_stack_depth[0];
return 0;
}
--
2.9.5
Powered by blists - more mailing lists