netdev - [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] selftests/bpf: check whether s32 is sufficient for kfunc offset

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:   Sun,  6 Feb 2022 12:31:07 +0800
From:   Hou Tao <hotforest@...il.com>
To:     Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, houtao1@...wei.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] selftests/bpf: check whether s32 is sufficient for kfunc offset

In add_kfunc_call(), bpf_kfunc_desc->imm with type s32 is used to
represent the offset of called kfunc from __bpf_call_base, so
add a test to ensure that the offset will not be overflowed.

Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@...wei.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c   | 42 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 42 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
index a1ebac70ec29..8055fbbf720b 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ksyms_module.c
@@ -3,9 +3,49 @@
 
 #include <test_progs.h>
 #include <network_helpers.h>
+#include <trace_helpers.h>
 #include "test_ksyms_module.lskel.h"
 #include "test_ksyms_module.skel.h"
 
+/*
+ * Check whether or not s32 in bpf_kfunc_desc is sufficient
+ * to represent the offset between bpf_testmod_test_mod_kfunc
+ * and __bpf_call_base.
+ */
+static void test_ksyms_module_valid_offset(void)
+{
+	struct test_ksyms_module *skel;
+	unsigned long long kfunc_addr;
+	unsigned long long base_addr;
+	long long actual_offset;
+	int used_offset;
+	int err;
+
+	if (!env.has_testmod) {
+		test__skip();
+		return;
+	}
+
+	/* Ensure kfunc call is supported */
+	skel = test_ksyms_module__open_and_load();
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "test_ksyms_module__open"))
+		return;
+
+	err = kallsyms_find("bpf_testmod_test_mod_kfunc", &kfunc_addr);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "find kfunc addr"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	err = kallsyms_find("__bpf_call_base", &base_addr);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "find base addr"))
+		goto cleanup;
+
+	used_offset = kfunc_addr - base_addr;
+	actual_offset = kfunc_addr - base_addr;
+	ASSERT_EQ((long long)used_offset, actual_offset, "kfunc offset overflowed");
+cleanup:
+	test_ksyms_module__destroy(skel);
+}
+
 static void test_ksyms_module_lskel(void)
 {
 	struct test_ksyms_module_lskel *skel;
@@ -62,6 +102,8 @@ static void test_ksyms_module_libbpf(void)
 
 void test_ksyms_module(void)
 {
+	if (test__start_subtest("valid_offset"))
+		test_ksyms_module_valid_offset();
 	if (test__start_subtest("lskel"))
 		test_ksyms_module_lskel();
 	if (test__start_subtest("libbpf"))
-- 
2.35.1