From d028f87517d6775dccff4ddbca2740826f9e53f1 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Menglong Dong Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 21:47:57 +0800 Subject: bpf: make the verifier tracks the "not equal" for regs We can derive some new information for BPF_JNE in regs_refine_cond_op(). Take following code for example: /* The type of "a" is u32 */ if (a > 0 && a < 100) { /* the range of the register for a is [0, 99], not [1, 99], * and will cause the following error: * * invalid zero-sized read * * as a can be 0. */ bpf_skb_store_bytes(skb, xx, xx, a, 0); } In the code above, "a > 0" will be compiled to "jmp xxx if a == 0". In the TRUE branch, the dst_reg will be marked as known to 0. However, in the fallthrough(FALSE) branch, the dst_reg will not be handled, which makes the [min, max] for a is [0, 99], not [1, 99]. For BPF_JNE, we can reduce the range of the dst reg if the src reg is a const and is exactly the edge of the dst reg. Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231219134800.1550388-2-menglong8.dong@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'kernel/bpf') diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 4ceec8c2a484..df1cae459c77 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -14336,7 +14336,43 @@ again: } break; case BPF_JNE: - /* we don't derive any new information for inequality yet */ + if (!is_reg_const(reg2, is_jmp32)) + swap(reg1, reg2); + if (!is_reg_const(reg2, is_jmp32)) + break; + + /* try to recompute the bound of reg1 if reg2 is a const and + * is exactly the edge of reg1. + */ + val = reg_const_value(reg2, is_jmp32); + if (is_jmp32) { + /* u32_min_value is not equal to 0xffffffff at this point, + * because otherwise u32_max_value is 0xffffffff as well, + * in such a case both reg1 and reg2 would be constants, + * jump would be predicted and reg_set_min_max() won't + * be called. + * + * Same reasoning works for all {u,s}{min,max}{32,64} cases + * below. + */ + if (reg1->u32_min_value == (u32)val) + reg1->u32_min_value++; + if (reg1->u32_max_value == (u32)val) + reg1->u32_max_value--; + if (reg1->s32_min_value == (s32)val) + reg1->s32_min_value++; + if (reg1->s32_max_value == (s32)val) + reg1->s32_max_value--; + } else { + if (reg1->umin_value == (u64)val) + reg1->umin_value++; + if (reg1->umax_value == (u64)val) + reg1->umax_value--; + if (reg1->smin_value == (s64)val) + reg1->smin_value++; + if (reg1->smax_value == (s64)val) + reg1->smax_value--; + } break; case BPF_JSET: if (!is_reg_const(reg2, is_jmp32)) -- cgit