[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171223190812.bh4gvbijrhrsqf4q@ast-mbp>
Date: Sat, 23 Dec 2017 11:08:14 -0800
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@...il.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: fix stacksafe exploration when comparing
states
On Sat, Dec 23, 2017 at 10:09:55AM +0000, Gianluca Borello wrote:
...
> Fixes: cc2b14d51053 ("bpf: teach verifier to recognize zero initialized stack")
> Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@...il.com>
> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 8b442ae125d0..93e1c77dae1d 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -4107,7 +4107,7 @@ static bool stacksafe(struct bpf_func_state *old,
>
> if (!(old->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ))
> /* explored state didn't use this */
> - return true;
> + continue;
argh. Not sure what I was thinking.
Applied, Thanks a lot Gianluca!
Powered by blists - more mailing lists