[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <B7A2A8DD-B070-4F80-A9A0-6570260D4346@fb.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2020 18:09:08 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: Introduce function-by-function
verification
> On Jan 8, 2020, at 10:37 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> wrote:
[...]
>
> Note that the stack limit of 512 still applies to the call chain regardless whether
> functions were static or global. The nested level of 8 also still applies. The
> same recursion prevention checks are in place as well.
>
> The type information and static/global kind is preserved after the verification
> hence in the above example global function f2() and f3() can be replaced later
> by equivalent functions with the same types that are loaded and verified later
> without affecting safety of this main() program. Such replacement (re-linking)
> of global functions is a subject of future patches.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
With one nit below.
[...]
> +
> +static int do_check_common(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int subprog)
> +{
> + struct bpf_verifier_state *state;
> + struct bpf_reg_state *regs;
> + int ret, i;
> +
> + env->prev_linfo = NULL;
> + env->pass_cnt++;
> +
> + state = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_verifier_state), GFP_KERNEL);
> + if (!state)
> + return -ENOMEM;
> + state->curframe = 0;
> + state->speculative = false;
> + state->branches = 1;
> + 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 */,
> + subprog);
> +
> + regs = state->frame[state->curframe]->regs;
> + if (subprog) {
> + ret = btf_prepare_func_args(env, subprog, regs);
> + if (ret)
> + goto out;
> + for (i = BPF_REG_1; i <= BPF_REG_5; i++) {
> + if (regs[i].type == PTR_TO_CTX)
> + mark_reg_known_zero(env, regs, i);
> + else if (regs[i].type == SCALAR_VALUE)
> + mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, i);
> + }
> + } else {
> + /* 1st arg to a function */
> + regs[BPF_REG_1].type = PTR_TO_CTX;
> + mark_reg_known_zero(env, regs, BPF_REG_1);
> + ret = btf_check_func_arg_match(env, subprog, regs);
> + if (ret == -EFAULT)
> + /* unlikely verifier bug. abort.
> + * ret == 0 and ret < 0 are sadly acceptable for
> + * main() function due to backward compatibility.
> + * Like socket filter program may be written as:
> + * int bpf_prog(struct pt_regs *ctx)
> + * and never dereference that ctx in the program.
> + * 'struct pt_regs' is a type mismatch for socket
> + * filter that should be using 'struct __sk_buff'.
> + */
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
> + ret = do_check(env);
> +out:
> + if (env->cur_state) {
I think env->cur_state will never be NULL here. This check is necessary
before this patch (when we allocate cur_state in do_check()).
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists