netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/3] fix BTF verification size resolution

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 08:42:53 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/3] fix BTF verification size resolution

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 5:59 AM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
>
> On 07/12/2019 08:03 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> > On 7/10/19 11:53 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >> BTF size resolution logic isn't always resolving type size correctly, leading
> >> to erroneous map creation failures due to value size mismatch.
> >>
> >> This patch set:
> >> 1. fixes the issue (patch #1);
> >> 2. adds tests for trickier cases (patch #2);
> >> 3. and converts few test cases utilizing BTF-defined maps, that previously
> >>     couldn't use typedef'ed arrays due to kernel bug (patch #3).
> >>
> >> Patch #1 can be applied against bpf tree, but selftest ones (#2 and #3) have
> >> to go against bpf-next for now.
> >
> > Why #2 and #3 have to go to bpf-next? bpf tree also accepts tests,
> > AFAIK. Maybe leave for Daniel and Alexei to decide in this particular case.
>
> Yes, corresponding test cases for fixes are also accepted for bpf tree, thanks.

Thanks for merging, Daniel! My thinking was that at the time I posted
patch set, BTF-defined map tests weren't yet merged into bpf, so I
assumed it has to go against bpf-next.

>
> >> Andrii Nakryiko (3):
> >>    bpf: fix BTF verifier size resolution logic
> >>    selftests/bpf: add trickier size resolution tests
> >>    selftests/bpf: use typedef'ed arrays as map values
> >
> > Looks good to me. Except minor comments in patch 1/3, Ack the series.
> > Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
> >
> >>
> >>   kernel/bpf/btf.c                              | 14 ++-
> >>   .../bpf/progs/test_get_stack_rawtp.c          |  3 +-
> >>   .../bpf/progs/test_stacktrace_build_id.c      |  3 +-
> >>   .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_stacktrace_map.c |  2 +-
> >>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.c        | 88 +++++++++++++++++++
> >>   5 files changed, 102 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>
>