[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171222191151.eagaah4y3eejvng7@ast-mbp>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2017 11:11:53 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: selftest for late caller stack size increase
On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 07:12:35PM +0100, Jann Horn wrote:
> This checks that it is not possible to bypass the total stack size check in
> update_stack_depth() by calling a function that uses a large amount of
> stack memory *before* using a large amount of stack memory in the caller.
>
> Currently, the first added testcase causes a rejection as expected, but
> the second testcase is (AFAICS incorrectly) accepted:
>
> [...]
> #483/p calls: stack overflow using two frames (post-call access) FAIL
> Unexpected success to load!
> 0: (85) call pc+2
> caller:
> R10=fp0,call_-1
> callee:
> frame1: R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0,call_0
> 3: (72) *(u8 *)(r10 -300) = 0
> 4: (b7) r0 = 0
> 5: (95) exit
> returning from callee:
> frame1: R0_w=inv0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0,call_0
> to caller at 1:
> R0_w=inv0 R10=fp0,call_-1
>
> from 5 to 1: R0=inv0 R10=fp0,call_-1
> 1: (72) *(u8 *)(r10 -300) = 0
> 2: (95) exit
> processed 6 insns, stack depth 300+300
got it. thanks for the test!
working on a fix.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists