From 332270fdc8b6fba07d059a9ad44df9e1a2ad4529 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Yonghong Song Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 22:52:42 -0700 Subject: bpf: enhance verifier to understand stack pointer arithmetic llvm 4.0 and above generates the code like below: .... 440: (b7) r1 = 15 441: (05) goto pc+73 515: (79) r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -152) 516: (bf) r7 = r10 517: (07) r7 += -112 518: (bf) r2 = r7 519: (0f) r2 += r1 520: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r8 +0) 521: (73) *(u8 *)(r2 +45) = r1 .... and the verifier complains "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'" for insn #521. This is because verifier marks register r2 as unknown value after #519 where r2 is a stack pointer and r1 holds a constant value. Teach verifier to recognize "stack_ptr + imm" and "stack_ptr + reg with const val" as valid stack_ptr with new offset. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 11 +++++++++++ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+) (limited to 'kernel/bpf/verifier.c') diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 6f8b6ed690be..c2ff608c1984 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -1922,6 +1922,17 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn) dst_reg->type = PTR_TO_STACK; dst_reg->imm = insn->imm; return 0; + } else if (opcode == BPF_ADD && + BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64 && + dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_STACK && + ((BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X && + regs[insn->src_reg].type == CONST_IMM) || + BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_K)) { + if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X) + dst_reg->imm += regs[insn->src_reg].imm; + else + dst_reg->imm += insn->imm; + return 0; } else if (opcode == BPF_ADD && BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64 && (dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_PACKET || -- cgit