summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat
-rw-r--r--include/linux/bpf_verifier.h4
-rw-r--r--kernel/bpf/verifier.c277
-rw-r--r--tools/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h2
-rw-r--r--tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile2
-rw-r--r--tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c8
-rw-r--r--tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c605
6 files changed, 730 insertions, 168 deletions
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index c561b986bab0..1632bb13ad8a 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -15,11 +15,11 @@
* In practice this is far bigger than any realistic pointer offset; this limit
* ensures that umax_value + (int)off + (int)size cannot overflow a u64.
*/
-#define BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF (1ULL << 31)
+#define BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF (1 << 29)
/* Maximum variable size permitted for ARG_CONST_SIZE[_OR_ZERO]. This ensures
* that converting umax_value to int cannot overflow.
*/
-#define BPF_MAX_VAR_SIZ INT_MAX
+#define BPF_MAX_VAR_SIZ (1 << 29)
/* Liveness marks, used for registers and spilled-regs (in stack slots).
* Read marks propagate upwards until they find a write mark; they record that
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index e39b01317b6f..04b24876cd23 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1059,6 +1059,11 @@ static int check_ptr_alignment(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
break;
case PTR_TO_STACK:
pointer_desc = "stack ";
+ /* The stack spill tracking logic in check_stack_write()
+ * and check_stack_read() relies on stack accesses being
+ * aligned.
+ */
+ strict = true;
break;
default:
break;
@@ -1067,6 +1072,29 @@ static int check_ptr_alignment(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
strict);
}
+/* truncate register to smaller size (in bytes)
+ * must be called with size < BPF_REG_SIZE
+ */
+static void coerce_reg_to_size(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, int size)
+{
+ u64 mask;
+
+ /* clear high bits in bit representation */
+ reg->var_off = tnum_cast(reg->var_off, size);
+
+ /* fix arithmetic bounds */
+ mask = ((u64)1 << (size * 8)) - 1;
+ if ((reg->umin_value & ~mask) == (reg->umax_value & ~mask)) {
+ reg->umin_value &= mask;
+ reg->umax_value &= mask;
+ } else {
+ reg->umin_value = 0;
+ reg->umax_value = mask;
+ }
+ reg->smin_value = reg->umin_value;
+ reg->smax_value = reg->umax_value;
+}
+
/* check whether memory at (regno + off) is accessible for t = (read | write)
* if t==write, value_regno is a register which value is stored into memory
* if t==read, value_regno is a register which will receive the value from memory
@@ -1200,9 +1228,7 @@ static int check_mem_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, u32 regn
if (!err && size < BPF_REG_SIZE && value_regno >= 0 && t == BPF_READ &&
regs[value_regno].type == SCALAR_VALUE) {
/* b/h/w load zero-extends, mark upper bits as known 0 */
- regs[value_regno].var_off =
- tnum_cast(regs[value_regno].var_off, size);
- __update_reg_bounds(&regs[value_regno]);
+ coerce_reg_to_size(&regs[value_regno], size);
}
return err;
}
@@ -1282,6 +1308,7 @@ static int check_stack_boundary(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
tnum_strn(tn_buf, sizeof(tn_buf), regs[regno].var_off);
verbose(env, "invalid variable stack read R%d var_off=%s\n",
regno, tn_buf);
+ return -EACCES;
}
off = regs[regno].off + regs[regno].var_off.value;
if (off >= 0 || off < -MAX_BPF_STACK || off + access_size > 0 ||
@@ -1772,14 +1799,6 @@ static int check_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int func_id, int insn_idx)
return 0;
}
-static void coerce_reg_to_32(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
-{
- /* clear high 32 bits */
- reg->var_off = tnum_cast(reg->var_off, 4);
- /* Update bounds */
- __update_reg_bounds(reg);
-}
-
static bool signed_add_overflows(s64 a, s64 b)
{
/* Do the add in u64, where overflow is well-defined */
@@ -1800,6 +1819,41 @@ static bool signed_sub_overflows(s64 a, s64 b)
return res > a;
}
+static bool check_reg_sane_offset(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
+ enum bpf_reg_type type)
+{
+ bool known = tnum_is_const(reg->var_off);
+ s64 val = reg->var_off.value;
+ s64 smin = reg->smin_value;
+
+ if (known && (val >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || val <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF)) {
+ verbose(env, "math between %s pointer and %lld is not allowed\n",
+ reg_type_str[type], val);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ if (reg->off >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || reg->off <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) {
+ verbose(env, "%s pointer offset %d is not allowed\n",
+ reg_type_str[type], reg->off);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ if (smin == S64_MIN) {
+ verbose(env, "math between %s pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed\n",
+ reg_type_str[type]);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ if (smin >= BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF || smin <= -BPF_MAX_VAR_OFF) {
+ verbose(env, "value %lld makes %s pointer be out of bounds\n",
+ smin, reg_type_str[type]);
+ return false;
+ }
+
+ return true;
+}
+
/* Handles arithmetic on a pointer and a scalar: computes new min/max and var_off.
* Caller should also handle BPF_MOV case separately.
* If we return -EACCES, caller may want to try again treating pointer as a
@@ -1836,29 +1890,25 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) != BPF_ALU64) {
/* 32-bit ALU ops on pointers produce (meaningless) scalars */
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env,
- "R%d 32-bit pointer arithmetic prohibited\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env,
+ "R%d 32-bit pointer arithmetic prohibited\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
if (ptr_reg->type == PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL) {
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL prohibited, null-check it first\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL prohibited, null-check it first\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
if (ptr_reg->type == CONST_PTR_TO_MAP) {
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on CONST_PTR_TO_MAP prohibited\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on CONST_PTR_TO_MAP prohibited\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
if (ptr_reg->type == PTR_TO_PACKET_END) {
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_PACKET_END prohibited\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_PACKET_END prohibited\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
@@ -1868,6 +1918,10 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
dst_reg->type = ptr_reg->type;
dst_reg->id = ptr_reg->id;
+ if (!check_reg_sane_offset(env, off_reg, ptr_reg->type) ||
+ !check_reg_sane_offset(env, ptr_reg, ptr_reg->type))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
switch (opcode) {
case BPF_ADD:
/* We can take a fixed offset as long as it doesn't overflow
@@ -1921,9 +1975,8 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
case BPF_SUB:
if (dst_reg == off_reg) {
/* scalar -= pointer. Creates an unknown scalar */
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d tried to subtract pointer from scalar\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env, "R%d tried to subtract pointer from scalar\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
/* We don't allow subtraction from FP, because (according to
@@ -1931,9 +1984,8 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
* be able to deal with it.
*/
if (ptr_reg->type == PTR_TO_STACK) {
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d subtraction from stack pointer prohibited\n",
- dst);
+ verbose(env, "R%d subtraction from stack pointer prohibited\n",
+ dst);
return -EACCES;
}
if (known && (ptr_reg->off - smin_val ==
@@ -1982,28 +2034,30 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
case BPF_AND:
case BPF_OR:
case BPF_XOR:
- /* bitwise ops on pointers are troublesome, prohibit for now.
- * (However, in principle we could allow some cases, e.g.
- * ptr &= ~3 which would reduce min_value by 3.)
- */
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d bitwise operator %s on pointer prohibited\n",
- dst, bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
+ /* bitwise ops on pointers are troublesome, prohibit. */
+ verbose(env, "R%d bitwise operator %s on pointer prohibited\n",
+ dst, bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
return -EACCES;
default:
/* other operators (e.g. MUL,LSH) produce non-pointer results */
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks)
- verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic with %s operator prohibited\n",
- dst, bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
+ verbose(env, "R%d pointer arithmetic with %s operator prohibited\n",
+ dst, bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
return -EACCES;
}
+ if (!check_reg_sane_offset(env, dst_reg, ptr_reg->type))
+ return -EINVAL;
+
__update_reg_bounds(dst_reg);
__reg_deduce_bounds(dst_reg);
__reg_bound_offset(dst_reg);
return 0;
}
+/* WARNING: This function does calculations on 64-bit values, but the actual
+ * execution may occur on 32-bit values. Therefore, things like bitshifts
+ * need extra checks in the 32-bit case.
+ */
static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_insn *insn,
struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg,
@@ -2014,12 +2068,8 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
bool src_known, dst_known;
s64 smin_val, smax_val;
u64 umin_val, umax_val;
+ u64 insn_bitness = (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64) ? 64 : 32;
- if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) != BPF_ALU64) {
- /* 32-bit ALU ops are (32,32)->64 */
- coerce_reg_to_32(dst_reg);
- coerce_reg_to_32(&src_reg);
- }
smin_val = src_reg.smin_value;
smax_val = src_reg.smax_value;
umin_val = src_reg.umin_value;
@@ -2027,6 +2077,12 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
src_known = tnum_is_const(src_reg.var_off);
dst_known = tnum_is_const(dst_reg->var_off);
+ if (!src_known &&
+ opcode != BPF_ADD && opcode != BPF_SUB && opcode != BPF_AND) {
+ __mark_reg_unknown(dst_reg);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
switch (opcode) {
case BPF_ADD:
if (signed_add_overflows(dst_reg->smin_value, smin_val) ||
@@ -2155,9 +2211,9 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
__update_reg_bounds(dst_reg);
break;
case BPF_LSH:
- if (umax_val > 63) {
- /* Shifts greater than 63 are undefined. This includes
- * shifts by a negative number.
+ if (umax_val >= insn_bitness) {
+ /* Shifts greater than 31 or 63 are undefined.
+ * This includes shifts by a negative number.
*/
mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
break;
@@ -2183,27 +2239,29 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
__update_reg_bounds(dst_reg);
break;
case BPF_RSH:
- if (umax_val > 63) {
- /* Shifts greater than 63 are undefined. This includes
- * shifts by a negative number.
+ if (umax_val >= insn_bitness) {
+ /* Shifts greater than 31 or 63 are undefined.
+ * This includes shifts by a negative number.
*/
mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
break;
}
- /* BPF_RSH is an unsigned shift, so make the appropriate casts */
- if (dst_reg->smin_value < 0) {
- if (umin_val) {
- /* Sign bit will be cleared */
- dst_reg->smin_value = 0;
- } else {
- /* Lost sign bit information */
- dst_reg->smin_value = S64_MIN;
- dst_reg->smax_value = S64_MAX;
- }
- } else {
- dst_reg->smin_value =
- (u64)(dst_reg->smin_value) >> umax_val;
- }
+ /* BPF_RSH is an unsigned shift. If the value in dst_reg might
+ * be negative, then either:
+ * 1) src_reg might be zero, so the sign bit of the result is
+ * unknown, so we lose our signed bounds
+ * 2) it's known negative, thus the unsigned bounds capture the
+ * signed bounds
+ * 3) the signed bounds cross zero, so they tell us nothing
+ * about the result
+ * If the value in dst_reg is known nonnegative, then again the
+ * unsigned bounts capture the signed bounds.
+ * Thus, in all cases it suffices to blow away our signed bounds
+ * and rely on inferring new ones from the unsigned bounds and
+ * var_off of the result.
+ */
+ dst_reg->smin_value = S64_MIN;
+ dst_reg->smax_value = S64_MAX;
if (src_known)
dst_reg->var_off = tnum_rshift(dst_reg->var_off,
umin_val);
@@ -2219,6 +2277,12 @@ static int adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
break;
}
+ if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) != BPF_ALU64) {
+ /* 32-bit ALU ops are (32,32)->32 */
+ coerce_reg_to_size(dst_reg, 4);
+ coerce_reg_to_size(&src_reg, 4);
+ }
+
__reg_deduce_bounds(dst_reg);
__reg_bound_offset(dst_reg);
return 0;
@@ -2233,7 +2297,6 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env), *dst_reg, *src_reg;
struct bpf_reg_state *ptr_reg = NULL, off_reg = {0};
u8 opcode = BPF_OP(insn->code);
- int rc;
dst_reg = &regs[insn->dst_reg];
src_reg = NULL;
@@ -2244,43 +2307,29 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
if (src_reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE) {
if (dst_reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE) {
/* Combining two pointers by any ALU op yields
- * an arbitrary scalar.
+ * an arbitrary scalar. Disallow all math except
+ * pointer subtraction
*/
- if (!env->allow_ptr_leaks) {
- verbose(env, "R%d pointer %s pointer prohibited\n",
- insn->dst_reg,
- bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
- return -EACCES;
+ if (opcode == BPF_SUB){
+ mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
+ return 0;
}
- mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
- return 0;
+ verbose(env, "R%d pointer %s pointer prohibited\n",
+ insn->dst_reg,
+ bpf_alu_string[opcode >> 4]);
+ return -EACCES;
} else {
/* scalar += pointer
* This is legal, but we have to reverse our
* src/dest handling in computing the range
*/
- rc = adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
- src_reg, dst_reg);
- if (rc == -EACCES && env->allow_ptr_leaks) {
- /* scalar += unknown scalar */
- __mark_reg_unknown(&off_reg);
- return adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(
- env, insn,
- dst_reg, off_reg);
- }
- return rc;
+ return adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
+ src_reg, dst_reg);
}
} else if (ptr_reg) {
/* pointer += scalar */
- rc = adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
- dst_reg, src_reg);
- if (rc == -EACCES && env->allow_ptr_leaks) {
- /* unknown scalar += scalar */
- __mark_reg_unknown(dst_reg);
- return adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(
- env, insn, dst_reg, *src_reg);
- }
- return rc;
+ return adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
+ dst_reg, src_reg);
}
} else {
/* Pretend the src is a reg with a known value, since we only
@@ -2289,17 +2338,9 @@ static int adjust_reg_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
off_reg.type = SCALAR_VALUE;
__mark_reg_known(&off_reg, insn->imm);
src_reg = &off_reg;
- if (ptr_reg) { /* pointer += K */
- rc = adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
- ptr_reg, src_reg);
- if (rc == -EACCES && env->allow_ptr_leaks) {
- /* unknown scalar += K */
- __mark_reg_unknown(dst_reg);
- return adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(
- env, insn, dst_reg, off_reg);
- }
- return rc;
- }
+ if (ptr_reg) /* pointer += K */
+ return adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(env, insn,
+ ptr_reg, src_reg);
}
/* Got here implies adding two SCALAR_VALUEs */
@@ -2396,17 +2437,20 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return -EACCES;
}
mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, insn->dst_reg);
- /* high 32 bits are known zero. */
- regs[insn->dst_reg].var_off = tnum_cast(
- regs[insn->dst_reg].var_off, 4);
- __update_reg_bounds(&regs[insn->dst_reg]);
+ coerce_reg_to_size(&regs[insn->dst_reg], 4);
}
} else {
/* case: R = imm
* remember the value we stored into this reg
*/
regs[insn->dst_reg].type = SCALAR_VALUE;
- __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg, insn->imm);
+ if (BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64) {
+ __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg,
+ insn->imm);
+ } else {
+ __mark_reg_known(regs + insn->dst_reg,
+ (u32)insn->imm);
+ }
}
} else if (opcode > BPF_END) {
@@ -3437,15 +3481,14 @@ static bool regsafe(struct bpf_reg_state *rold, struct bpf_reg_state *rcur,
return range_within(rold, rcur) &&
tnum_in(rold->var_off, rcur->var_off);
} else {
- /* if we knew anything about the old value, we're not
- * equal, because we can't know anything about the
- * scalar value of the pointer in the new value.
+ /* We're trying to use a pointer in place of a scalar.
+ * Even if the scalar was unbounded, this could lead to
+ * pointer leaks because scalars are allowed to leak
+ * while pointers are not. We could make this safe in
+ * special cases if root is calling us, but it's
+ * probably not worth the hassle.
*/
- return rold->umin_value == 0 &&
- rold->umax_value == U64_MAX &&
- rold->smin_value == S64_MIN &&
- rold->smax_value == S64_MAX &&
- tnum_is_unknown(rold->var_off);
+ return false;
}
case PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE:
/* If the new min/max/var_off satisfy the old ones and
diff --git a/tools/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h b/tools/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h
index cefe7c7cd4f6..0a8e37a519f2 100644
--- a/tools/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h
+++ b/tools/arch/s390/include/uapi/asm/bpf_perf_event.h
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
#ifndef _UAPI__ASM_BPF_PERF_EVENT_H__
#define _UAPI__ASM_BPF_PERF_EVENT_H__
-#include <asm/ptrace.h>
+#include "ptrace.h"
typedef user_pt_regs bpf_user_pt_regs_t;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
index 792af7c3b74f..05fc4e2e7b3a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ ifneq ($(wildcard $(GENHDR)),)
endif
CFLAGS += -Wall -O2 -I$(APIDIR) -I$(LIBDIR) -I$(GENDIR) $(GENFLAGS) -I../../../include
-LDLIBS += -lcap -lelf
+LDLIBS += -lcap -lelf -lrt
TEST_GEN_PROGS = test_verifier test_tag test_maps test_lru_map test_lpm_map test_progs \
test_align test_verifier_log test_dev_cgroup
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
index 69427531408d..6761be18a91f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs.c
@@ -351,7 +351,7 @@ static void test_bpf_obj_id(void)
info_len != sizeof(struct bpf_map_info) ||
strcmp((char *)map_infos[i].name, expected_map_name),
"get-map-info(fd)",
- "err %d errno %d type %d(%d) info_len %u(%lu) key_size %u value_size %u max_entries %u map_flags %X name %s(%s)\n",
+ "err %d errno %d type %d(%d) info_len %u(%Zu) key_size %u value_size %u max_entries %u map_flags %X name %s(%s)\n",
err, errno,
map_infos[i].type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY,
info_len, sizeof(struct bpf_map_info),
@@ -395,7 +395,7 @@ static void test_bpf_obj_id(void)
*(int *)prog_infos[i].map_ids != map_infos[i].id ||
strcmp((char *)prog_infos[i].name, expected_prog_name),
"get-prog-info(fd)",
- "err %d errno %d i %d type %d(%d) info_len %u(%lu) jit_enabled %d jited_prog_len %u xlated_prog_len %u jited_prog %d xlated_prog %d load_time %lu(%lu) uid %u(%u) nr_map_ids %u(%u) map_id %u(%u) name %s(%s)\n",
+ "err %d errno %d i %d type %d(%d) info_len %u(%Zu) jit_enabled %d jited_prog_len %u xlated_prog_len %u jited_prog %d xlated_prog %d load_time %lu(%lu) uid %u(%u) nr_map_ids %u(%u) map_id %u(%u) name %s(%s)\n",
err, errno, i,
prog_infos[i].type, BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER,
info_len, sizeof(struct bpf_prog_info),
@@ -463,7 +463,7 @@ static void test_bpf_obj_id(void)
memcmp(&prog_info, &prog_infos[i], info_len) ||
*(int *)prog_info.map_ids != saved_map_id,
"get-prog-info(next_id->fd)",
- "err %d errno %d info_len %u(%lu) memcmp %d map_id %u(%u)\n",
+ "err %d errno %d info_len %u(%Zu) memcmp %d map_id %u(%u)\n",
err, errno, info_len, sizeof(struct bpf_prog_info),
memcmp(&prog_info, &prog_infos[i], info_len),
*(int *)prog_info.map_ids, saved_map_id);
@@ -509,7 +509,7 @@ static void test_bpf_obj_id(void)
memcmp(&map_info, &map_infos[i], info_len) ||
array_value != array_magic_value,
"check get-map-info(next_id->fd)",
- "err %d errno %d info_len %u(%lu) memcmp %d array_value %llu(%llu)\n",
+ "err %d errno %d info_len %u(%Zu) memcmp %d array_value %llu(%llu)\n",
err, errno, info_len, sizeof(struct bpf_map_info),
memcmp(&map_info, &map_infos[i], info_len),
array_value, array_magic_value);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index b03ecfd7185b..b51017404c62 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -422,9 +422,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
- .errstr_unpriv = "R1 subtraction from stack pointer",
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
- .errstr = "R1 invalid mem access",
+ .errstr = "R1 subtraction from stack pointer",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -606,7 +604,6 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
},
.errstr = "misaligned stack access",
.result = REJECT,
- .flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
},
{
"invalid map_fd for function call",
@@ -1797,7 +1794,6 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "misaligned stack access off (0x0; 0x0)+-8+2 size 8",
- .flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - bad alignment on reg",
@@ -1810,7 +1806,6 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "misaligned stack access off (0x0; 0x0)+-10+8 size 8",
- .flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - out of bounds low",
@@ -1862,9 +1857,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
- .result = ACCEPT,
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
- .errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer += pointer",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .errstr = "R1 pointer += pointer",
},
{
"unpriv: neg pointer",
@@ -2592,7 +2586,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4),
- BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, len)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
@@ -2899,7 +2894,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
- .errstr = "invalid access to packet",
+ .errstr = "R3 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_PACKET_END",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
@@ -3885,9 +3880,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3, 11 },
- .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer += pointer",
- .errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .errstr = "R0 pointer += pointer",
.result = REJECT,
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
@@ -3928,7 +3921,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
- .errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
+ .errstr = "R4 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
@@ -3949,7 +3942,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
- .errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
+ .errstr = "R4 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
@@ -3970,7 +3963,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
- .errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
+ .errstr = "R4 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
@@ -5195,10 +5188,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
- .errstr_unpriv = "R0 bitwise operator &= on pointer",
- .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "R0 bitwise operator &= on pointer",
.result = REJECT,
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 2",
@@ -5214,10 +5205,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
- .errstr_unpriv = "R0 32-bit pointer arithmetic prohibited",
- .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "R0 32-bit pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result = REJECT,
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 3",
@@ -5233,10 +5222,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
- .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic with /= operator",
- .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "R0 pointer arithmetic with /= operator",
.result = REJECT,
- .result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 4",
@@ -6019,8 +6006,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map_in_map = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R1 type=inv expected=map_ptr",
- .errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer arithmetic on CONST_PTR_TO_MAP prohibited",
+ .errstr = "R1 pointer arithmetic on CONST_PTR_TO_MAP prohibited",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6324,7 +6310,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6348,7 +6334,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6374,7 +6360,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R8 invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6399,7 +6385,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R8 invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6447,7 +6433,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6518,7 +6504,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6569,7 +6555,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6596,7 +6582,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6622,7 +6608,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6651,7 +6637,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6681,7 +6667,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -7),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -6709,8 +6695,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
- .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer comparison prohibited",
- .errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
+ .errstr = "unbounded min value",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
@@ -6766,6 +6751,462 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.result = REJECT,
},
{
+ "bounds check based on zero-extended MOV",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
+ /* r2 = 0x0000'0000'ffff'ffff */
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0xffffffff),
+ /* r2 = 0 */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 32),
+ /* no-op */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
+ /* access at offset 0 */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .result = ACCEPT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check based on sign-extended MOV. test1",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
+ /* r2 = 0xffff'ffff'ffff'ffff */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0xffffffff),
+ /* r2 = 0xffff'ffff */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 32),
+ /* r0 = <oob pointer> */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
+ /* access to OOB pointer */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "map_value pointer and 4294967295",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check based on sign-extended MOV. test2",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
+ /* r2 = 0xffff'ffff'ffff'ffff */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0xffffffff),
+ /* r2 = 0xfff'ffff */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 36),
+ /* r0 = <oob pointer> */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
+ /* access to OOB pointer */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "R0 min value is outside of the array range",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check based on reg_off + var_off + insn_off. test1",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_6, 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, (1 << 29) - 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, (1 << 29) - 1),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 3),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 4 },
+ .errstr = "value_size=8 off=1073741825",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check based on reg_off + var_off + insn_off. test2",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_6, 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, (1 << 30) - 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, (1 << 29) - 1),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 3),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 4 },
+ .errstr = "value 1073741823",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after truncation of non-boundary-crossing range",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
+ /* r2 = 0x10'0000'0000 */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 36),
+ /* r1 = [0x10'0000'0000, 0x10'0000'00ff] */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
+ /* r1 = [0x10'7fff'ffff, 0x10'8000'00fe] */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] */
+ BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ /* r1 = 0 */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 8),
+ /* no-op */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* access at offset 0 */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .result = ACCEPT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after truncation of boundary-crossing range (1)",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0xffff'ff80, 0x1'0000'007f] */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0xffff'ff80, 0xffff'ffff] or
+ * [0x0000'0000, 0x0000'007f]
+ */
+ BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] or
+ * [0xffff'ffff'0000'0080, 0xffff'ffff'ffff'ffff]
+ */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = 0 or
+ * [0x00ff'ffff'ff00'0000, 0x00ff'ffff'ffff'ffff]
+ */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 8),
+ /* no-op or OOB pointer computation */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* potentially OOB access */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ /* not actually fully unbounded, but the bound is very high */
+ .errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after truncation of boundary-crossing range (2)",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0xffff'ff80, 0x1'0000'007f] */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0xffff'ff80, 0xffff'ffff] or
+ * [0x0000'0000, 0x0000'007f]
+ * difference to previous test: truncation via MOV32
+ * instead of ALU32.
+ */
+ BPF_MOV32_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] or
+ * [0xffff'ffff'0000'0080, 0xffff'ffff'ffff'ffff]
+ */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffff80 >> 1),
+ /* r1 = 0 or
+ * [0x00ff'ffff'ff00'0000, 0x00ff'ffff'ffff'ffff]
+ */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 8),
+ /* no-op or OOB pointer computation */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* potentially OOB access */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ /* not actually fully unbounded, but the bound is very high */
+ .errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after wrapping 32-bit addition",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
+ /* r1 = 0x7fff'ffff */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ /* r1 = 0xffff'fffe */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ /* r1 = 0 */
+ BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 2),
+ /* no-op */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* access at offset 0 */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .result = ACCEPT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after shift with oversized count operand",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 32),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
+ /* r1 = (u32)1 << (u32)32 = ? */
+ BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
+ /* r1 = [0x0000, 0xffff] */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_1, 0xffff),
+ /* computes unknown pointer, potentially OOB */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* potentially OOB access */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "R0 max value is outside of the array range",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check after right shift of maybe-negative number",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
+ /* r1 = [0x00, 0xff] */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* r1 = [-0x01, 0xfe] */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 1),
+ /* r1 = 0 or 0xff'ffff'ffff'ffff */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 8),
+ /* r1 = 0 or 0xffff'ffff'ffff */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 8),
+ /* computes unknown pointer, potentially OOB */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ /* potentially OOB access */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ /* exit */
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check map access with off+size signed 32bit overflow. test1",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x7ffffffe),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_JMP_A(0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "map_value pointer and 2147483646",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check map access with off+size signed 32bit overflow. test2",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_JMP_A(0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "pointer offset 1073741822",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check map access with off+size signed 32bit overflow. test3",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 2),
+ BPF_JMP_A(0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "pointer offset -1073741822",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "bounds check map access with off+size signed 32bit overflow. test4",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1000000),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MUL, BPF_REG_1, 1000000),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 2),
+ BPF_JMP_A(0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .errstr = "map_value pointer and 1000000000000",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "pointer/scalar confusion in state equality check (way 1)",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_JMP_A(1),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_JMP_A(0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr as return value"
+ },
+ {
+ "pointer/scalar confusion in state equality check (way 2)",
+ .insns = {
+ 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_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ 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_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_JMP_A(1),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 3 },
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr as return value"
+ },
+ {
"variable-offset ctx access",
.insns = {
/* Get an unknown value */
@@ -6807,6 +7248,71 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
{
+ "indirect variable-offset stack access",
+ .insns = {
+ /* Fill the top 8 bytes of the stack */
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
+ /* Get an unknown value */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ /* Make it small and 4-byte aligned */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 4),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_2, 8),
+ /* add it to fp. We now have either fp-4 or fp-8, but
+ * we don't know which
+ */
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ /* dereference it indirectly */
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
+ BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map1 = { 5 },
+ .errstr = "variable stack read R2",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
+ },
+ {
+ "direct stack access with 32-bit wraparound. test1",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x7fffffff),
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN()
+ },
+ .errstr = "fp pointer and 2147483647",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "direct stack access with 32-bit wraparound. test2",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x3fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x3fffffff),
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN()
+ },
+ .errstr = "fp pointer and 1073741823",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
+ "direct stack access with 32-bit wraparound. test3",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 0x1fffffff),
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN()
+ },
+ .errstr = "fp pointer offset 1073741822",
+ .result = REJECT
+ },
+ {
"liveness pruning and write screening",
.insns = {
/* Get an unknown value */
@@ -7128,6 +7634,19 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
+ "pkt_end - pkt_start is allowed",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ },
+ {
"XDP pkt read, pkt_end mangling, bad access 1",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
@@ -7142,7 +7661,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
- .errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
+ .errstr = "R3 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_PACKET_END",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
@@ -7161,7 +7680,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
- .errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
+ .errstr = "R3 pointer arithmetic on PTR_TO_PACKET_END",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
generated by cgit (git 2.34.1) at 2024-06-08 21:47:06 +0000