Commit 8a021e7
bpf: Simplify checking size of helper accesses
This patch simplifies the verification of size arguments associated to
pointer arguments to helpers and kfuncs. Many helpers take a pointer
argument followed by the size of the memory access performed to be
performed through that pointer. Before this patch, the handling of the
size argument in check_mem_size_reg() was confusing and wasteful: if the
size register's lower bound was 0, then the verification was done twice:
once considering the size of the access to be the lower-bound of the
respective argument, and once considering the upper bound (even if the
two are the same). The upper bound checking is a super-set of the
lower-bound checking(*), except: the only point of the lower-bound check
is to handle the case where zero-sized-accesses are explicitly not
allowed and the lower-bound is zero. This static condition is now
checked explicitly, replacing a much more complex, expensive and
confusing verification call to check_helper_mem_access().
Error messages change in this patch. Before, messages about illegal
zero-size accesses depended on the type of the pointer and on other
conditions, and sometimes the message was plain wrong: in some tests
that changed you'll see that the old message was something like "R1 min
value is outside of the allowed memory range", where R1 is the pointer
register; the error was wrongly claiming that the pointer was bad
instead of the size being bad. Other times the information that the size
came for a register with a possible range of values was wrong, and the
error presented the size as a fixed zero. Now the errors refer to the
right register. However, the old error messages did contain useful
information about the pointer register which is now lost; recovering
this information was deemed not important enough.
(*) Besides standing to reason that the checks for a bigger size access
are a super-set of the checks for a smaller size access, I have also
mechanically verified this by reading the code for all types of
pointers. I could convince myself that it's true for all but
PTR_TO_BTF_ID (check_ptr_to_btf_access). There, simply looking
line-by-line does not immediately prove what we want. If anyone has any
qualms, let me know.
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]1 parent 2ab1efa commit 8a021e7
File tree
3 files changed
+9
-11
lines changed- kernel/bpf
- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs
3 files changed
+9
-11
lines changed| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
7279 | 7279 | | |
7280 | 7280 | | |
7281 | 7281 | | |
7282 | | - | |
7283 | | - | |
7284 | | - | |
7285 | | - | |
7286 | | - | |
7287 | | - | |
| 7282 | + | |
| 7283 | + | |
| 7284 | + | |
| 7285 | + | |
7288 | 7286 | | |
7289 | 7287 | | |
7290 | 7288 | | |
| |||
Lines changed: 4 additions & 4 deletions
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
91 | 91 | | |
92 | 92 | | |
93 | 93 | | |
94 | | - | |
| 94 | + | |
95 | 95 | | |
96 | 96 | | |
97 | 97 | | |
| |||
221 | 221 | | |
222 | 222 | | |
223 | 223 | | |
224 | | - | |
| 224 | + | |
225 | 225 | | |
226 | 226 | | |
227 | 227 | | |
| |||
386 | 386 | | |
387 | 387 | | |
388 | 388 | | |
389 | | - | |
| 389 | + | |
390 | 390 | | |
391 | 391 | | |
392 | 392 | | |
| |||
556 | 556 | | |
557 | 557 | | |
558 | 558 | | |
559 | | - | |
| 559 | + | |
560 | 560 | | |
561 | 561 | | |
562 | 562 | | |
| |||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change | |
|---|---|---|---|
| |||
64 | 64 | | |
65 | 65 | | |
66 | 66 | | |
67 | | - | |
| 67 | + | |
68 | 68 | | |
69 | 69 | | |
70 | 70 | | |
| |||
0 commit comments