netdev - [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/14] bpf: Search and add kfuncs in struct

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: <20241220195619.2022866-8-amery.hung@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 11:55:33 -0800
From: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	daniel@...earbox.net,
	andrii@...nel.org,
	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
	martin.lau@...nel.org,
	sinquersw@...il.com,
	toke@...hat.com,
	jhs@...atatu.com,
	jiri@...nulli.us,
	stfomichev@...il.com,
	ekarani.silvestre@....ufcg.edu.br,
	yangpeihao@...u.edu.cn,
	xiyou.wangcong@...il.com,
	yepeilin.cs@...il.com,
	ameryhung@...il.com,
	amery.hung@...edance.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/14] bpf: Search and add kfuncs in struct_ops prologue and epilogue

From: Amery Hung <amery.hung@...edance.com>

Currently, add_kfunc_call() is only invoked once before the main
verification loop. Therefore, the verifier could not find the
bpf_kfunc_btf_tab of a new kfunc call which is not seen in user defined
struct_ops operators but introduced in gen_prologue or gen_epilogue
during do_misc_fixup(). Fix this by searching kfuncs in the patching
instruction buffer and add them to prog->aux->kfunc_tab.

Signed-off-by: Amery Hung <amery.hung@...edance.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 25 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 0e6a3c4daa7d..949812d955ca 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -3214,6 +3214,21 @@ bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
 	return res ? &res->func_model : NULL;
 }
 
+static int add_kfunc_in_insns(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+			      struct bpf_insn *insn, int cnt)
+{
+	int i, ret;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++, insn++) {
+		if (bpf_pseudo_kfunc_call(insn)) {
+			ret = add_kfunc_call(env, insn->imm, insn->off);
+			if (ret < 0)
+				return ret;
+		}
+	}
+	return 0;
+}
+
 static int add_subprog_and_kfunc(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	struct bpf_subprog_info *subprog = env->subprog_info;
@@ -20278,7 +20293,7 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 {
 	struct bpf_subprog_info *subprogs = env->subprog_info;
 	const struct bpf_verifier_ops *ops = env->ops;
-	int i, cnt, size, ctx_field_size, delta = 0, epilogue_cnt = 0;
+	int i, cnt, size, ctx_field_size, ret, delta = 0, epilogue_cnt = 0;
 	const int insn_cnt = env->prog->len;
 	struct bpf_insn *epilogue_buf = env->epilogue_buf;
 	struct bpf_insn *insn_buf = env->insn_buf;
@@ -20307,6 +20322,10 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 				return -ENOMEM;
 			env->prog = new_prog;
 			delta += cnt - 1;
+
+			ret = add_kfunc_in_insns(env, epilogue_buf, epilogue_cnt - 1);
+			if (ret < 0)
+				return ret;
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -20327,6 +20346,10 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 
 			env->prog = new_prog;
 			delta += cnt - 1;
+
+			ret = add_kfunc_in_insns(env, insn_buf, cnt - 1);
+			if (ret < 0)
+				return ret;
 		}
 	}
 
-- 
2.47.0