diff options
author | Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> | 2021-04-20 04:23:34 +0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> | 2021-04-20 04:23:34 +0300 |
commit | 69443c47305e541f5bf8b5a26f442c0c7f34cafe (patch) | |
tree | 0a40b8c3beeb6f735fc54e932bdd5a85ad8ec3d8 /tools | |
parent | 137733d08f4ab14a354dacaa9a8fc35217747605 (diff) | |
parent | c77cec5c207b68a3cbc2af2f81070ec428f41145 (diff) | |
download | linux-69443c47305e541f5bf8b5a26f442c0c7f34cafe.tar.xz |
Merge branch 'bpf: refine retval for bpf_get_task_stack helper'
Dave Marchevsky says:
====================
Similarly to the bpf_get_stack helper, bpf_get_task_stack's return value
can be more tightly bound by the verifier - it's the number of bytes
written to a user-supplied buffer, or a negative error value. Currently
the verifier believes bpf_task_get_stack's retval bounds to be unknown,
requiring extraneous bounds checking to remedy.
Adding it to do_refine_retval_range fixes the issue, as evidenced by
new selftests which fail to load if retval bounds are not refined.
v2: Addressed comment nit in patch 3
====================
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'tools')
-rw-r--r-- | tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c | 1 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_task_stack.c | 27 | ||||
-rw-r--r-- | tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c | 43 |
3 files changed, 71 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c index 74c45d557a2b..2d3590cfb5e1 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c @@ -147,6 +147,7 @@ static void test_task_stack(void) return; do_dummy_read(skel->progs.dump_task_stack); + do_dummy_read(skel->progs.get_task_user_stacks); bpf_iter_task_stack__destroy(skel); } diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_task_stack.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_task_stack.c index 50e59a2e142e..43c36f5f7649 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_task_stack.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_task_stack.c @@ -35,3 +35,30 @@ int dump_task_stack(struct bpf_iter__task *ctx) return 0; } + +SEC("iter/task") +int get_task_user_stacks(struct bpf_iter__task *ctx) +{ + struct seq_file *seq = ctx->meta->seq; + struct task_struct *task = ctx->task; + uint64_t buf_sz = 0; + int64_t res; + + if (task == (void *)0) + return 0; + + res = bpf_get_task_stack(task, entries, + MAX_STACK_TRACE_DEPTH * SIZE_OF_ULONG, BPF_F_USER_STACK); + if (res <= 0) + return 0; + + buf_sz += res; + + /* If the verifier doesn't refine bpf_get_task_stack res, and instead + * assumes res is entirely unknown, this program will fail to load as + * the verifier will believe that max buf_sz value allows reading + * past the end of entries in bpf_seq_write call + */ + bpf_seq_write(seq, &entries, buf_sz); + return 0; +} diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c index 69b048cf46d9..3e024c891178 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c @@ -42,3 +42,46 @@ .result = ACCEPT, .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, }, +{ + "bpf_get_task_stack return R0 range is refined", + .insns = { + BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0), + BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_6, 0), // ctx->meta->seq + BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1, 8), // ctx->task + BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), // fixup_map_array_48b + BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8), + BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_7, 0, 2), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_0), // keep buf for seq_write + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 48), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_get_task_stack), + BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2), + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_9), + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0), + BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_seq_write), + + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), + }, + .result = ACCEPT, + .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, + .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_ITER, + .kfunc = "task", + .runs = -1, // Don't run, just load + .fixup_map_array_48b = { 3 }, +}, |