xiaomi-sm8450/android_kernel_xiaomi_sm8450
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

bpf: improve verifier packet range checks

Browse Source 
llvm can optimize the 'if (ptr > data_end)' checks to be in the order
slightly different than the original C code which will confuse verifier.
Like:
if (ptr + 16 > data_end)
  return TC_ACT_SHOT;
// may be followed by
if (ptr + 14 > data_end)
  return TC_ACT_SHOT;
while llvm can see that 'ptr' is valid for all 16 bytes,
the verifier could not.
Fix verifier logic to account for such case and add a test.

Reported-by: Huapeng Zhou <hzhou@fb.com>
Fixes: 969bf05eb3 ("bpf: direct packet access")
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
Alexei Starovoitov
2017-03-24 15:57:33 -07:00
committed by David S. Miller
parent 43a6684519
commit b1977682a3
2 changed files with 23 additions and 2 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

20
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
View File

@@ -3417,6 +3417,26 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_XMIT,
},
{
"overlapping checks for direct packet access",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_XMIT,
},
{
"invalid access of tc_classid for LWT_IN",
.insns = {