[ Upstream commit a833a17aeac73b33f79433d7cee68d5cafd71e4f ]
This patch fixes a bug around the verification of possibly-zero-sized
stack accesses. When the access was done through a var-offset stack
pointer, check_stack_access_within_bounds was incorrectly computing the
maximum-offset of a zero-sized read to be the same as the register's min
offset. Instead, we have to take in account the register's maximum
possible value. The patch also simplifies how the max offset is checked;
the check is now simpler than for min offset.
The bug was allowing accesses to erroneously pass the
check_stack_access_within_bounds() checks, only to later crash in
check_stack_range_initialized() when all the possibly-affected stack
slots are iterated (this time with a correct max offset).
check_stack_range_initialized() is relying on
check_stack_access_within_bounds() for its accesses to the
stack-tracking vector to be within bounds; in the case of zero-sized
accesses, we were essentially only verifying that the lowest possible
slot was within bounds. We would crash when the max-offset of the stack
pointer was >= 0 (which shouldn't pass verification, and hopefully is
not something anyone's code attempts to do in practice).
Thanks Hao for reporting!
Fixes: 01f810ace9ed3 ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231207041150.229139-2-andreimatei1@gmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CACkBjsZGEUaRCHsmaX=h-efVogsRfK1FPxmkgb0Os_frnHiNdw@mail.gmail.com/
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit ab125ed3ec1c10ccc36bc98c7a4256ad114a3dae ]
When register is spilled onto a stack as a 1/2/4-byte register, we set
slot_type[BPF_REG_SIZE - 1] (plus potentially few more below it,
depending on actual spill size). So to check if some stack slot has
spilled register we need to consult slot_type[7], not slot_type[0].
To avoid the need to remember and double-check this in the future, just
use is_spilled_reg() helper.
Fixes: 27113c59b6d0 ("bpf: Check the other end of slot_type for STACK_SPILL")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit b8e3a87a627b575896e448021e5c2f8a3bc19931 ]
Currently get_perf_callchain only supports user stack walking for
the current task. Passing the correct *crosstask* param will return
0 frames if the task passed to __bpf_get_stack isn't the current
one instead of a single incorrect frame/address. This change
passes the correct *crosstask* param but also does a preemptive
check in __bpf_get_stack if the task is current and returns
-EOPNOTSUPP if it is not.
This issue was found using bpf_get_task_stack inside a BPF
iterator ("iter/task"), which iterates over all tasks.
bpf_get_task_stack works fine for fetching kernel stacks
but because get_perf_callchain relies on the caller to know
if the requested *task* is the current one (via *crosstask*)
it was failing in a confusing way.
It might be possible to get user stacks for all tasks utilizing
something like access_process_vm but that requires the bpf
program calling bpf_get_task_stack to be sleepable and would
therefore be a breaking change.
Fixes: fa28dcb82a38 ("bpf: Introduce helper bpf_get_task_stack()")
Signed-off-by: Jordan Rome <jordalgo@meta.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231108112334.3433136-1-jordalgo@meta.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
[ Upstream commit 9b75dbeb36fcd9fc7ed51d370310d0518a387769 ]
When looking up an element in LPM trie, the condition 'matchlen ==
trie->max_prefixlen' will never return true, if key->prefixlen is larger
than trie->max_prefixlen. Consequently all elements in the LPM trie will
be visited and no element is returned in the end.
To resolve this, check key->prefixlen first before walking the LPM trie.
Fixes: b95a5c4db09b ("bpf: add a longest prefix match trie map implementation")
Signed-off-by: Florian Lehner <dev@der-flo.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231105085801.3742-1-dev@der-flo.net
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
commit 291d044fd51f8484066300ee42afecf8c8db7b3a upstream.
BPF_END and BPF_NEG has a different specification for the source bit in
the opcode compared to other ALU/ALU64 instructions, and is either
reserved or use to specify the byte swap endianness. In both cases the
source bit does not encode source operand location, and src_reg is a
reserved field.
backtrack_insn() currently does not differentiate BPF_END and BPF_NEG
from other ALU/ALU64 instructions, which leads to r0 being incorrectly
marked as precise when processing BPF_ALU | BPF_TO_BE | BPF_END
instructions. This commit teaches backtrack_insn() to correctly mark
precision for such case.
While precise tracking of BPF_NEG and other BPF_END instructions are
correct and does not need fixing, this commit opt to process all BPF_NEG
and BPF_END instructions within the same if-clause to better align with
current convention used in the verifier (e.g. check_alu_op).
Fixes: b5dc0163d8fd ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Reported-by: Mohamed Mahmoud <mmahmoud@redhat.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/87jzrrwptf.fsf@toke.dk
Tested-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
Tested-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@epfl.ch>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231102053913.12004-2-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
[ Upstream commit 66d9111f3517f85ef2af0337ece02683ce0faf21 ]
Now that bpf_throw kfunc is the first such call instruction that has
noreturn semantics within the verifier, this also kicks in dead code
elimination in unprecedented ways. For one, any instruction following
a bpf_throw call will never be marked as seen. Moreover, if a callchain
ends up throwing, any instructions after the call instruction to the
eventually throwing subprog in callers will also never be marked as
seen.
The tempting way to fix this would be to emit extra 'int3' instructions
which bump the jited_len of a program, and ensure that during runtime
when a program throws, we can discover its boundaries even if the call
instruction to bpf_throw (or to subprogs that always throw) is emitted
as the final instruction in the program.
An example of such a program would be this:
do_something():
...
r0 = 0
exit
foo():
r1 = 0
call bpf_throw
r0 = 0
exit
bar(cond):
if r1 != 0 goto pc+2
call do_something
exit
call foo
r0 = 0 // Never seen by verifier
exit //
main(ctx):
r1 = ...
call bar
r0 = 0
exit
Here, if we do end up throwing, the stacktrace would be the following:
bpf_throw
foo
bar
main
In bar, the final instruction emitted will be the call to foo, as such,
the return address will be the subsequent instruction (which the JIT
emits as int3 on x86). This will end up lying outside the jited_len of
the program, thus, when unwinding, we will fail to discover the return
address as belonging to any program and end up in a panic due to the
unreliable stack unwinding of BPF programs that we never expect.
To remedy this case, make bpf_prog_ksym_find treat IP == ksym.end as
part of the BPF program, so that is_bpf_text_address returns true when
such a case occurs, and we are able to unwind reliably when the final
instruction ends up being a call instruction.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230912233214.1518551-12-memxor@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
