netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix another bpftool segfault without skeleton code enabled

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]

Message-ID: <90a6acce-93f7-62df-fc96-0294cb168d64@isovalent.com>
Date:   Wed, 8 Jul 2020 15:44:45 +0100
From:   Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>
To:     louis.peens@...ronome.com, ast@...nel.org
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, oss-drivers@...ronome.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix another bpftool segfault without
 skeleton code enabled

2020-07-08 13:08 UTC+0200 ~ louis.peens@...ronome.com
> From: Louis Peens <louis.peens@...ronome.com>
> 
> emit_obj_refs_json needs to added the same as with emit_obj_refs_plain
> to prevent segfaults, similar to Commit "8ae4121bd89e bpf: Fix bpftool
> without skeleton code enabled"). See the error below:
> 
>     # ./bpftool -p prog
>     {
>         "error": "bpftool built without PID iterator support"
>     },[{
>             "id": 2,
>             "type": "cgroup_skb",
>             "tag": "7be49e3934a125ba",
>             "gpl_compatible": true,
>             "loaded_at": 1594052789,
>             "uid": 0,
>             "bytes_xlated": 296,
>             "jited": true,
>             "bytes_jited": 203,
>             "bytes_memlock": 4096,
>             "map_ids": [2,3
>     Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> 
> The same happens for ./bpftool -p map, as well as ./bpftool -j prog/map.
> 
> Fixes: d53dee3fe013 ("tools/bpftool: Show info for processes holding BPF map/prog/link/btf FDs")
> Signed-off-by: Louis Peens <louis.peens@...ronome.com>
> Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...ronome.com>

Reviewed-by: Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>

Thanks Louis.