-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5
bpf: Fix tnum_overlap to check for zero mask first #6220
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
bpf: Fix tnum_overlap to check for zero mask first #6220
Conversation
|
Upstream branch: e758657 |
4d1f3ab to
7ba9a34
Compare
|
Upstream branch: ff88079 |
9caf4b9 to
ce73bd0
Compare
7ba9a34 to
2991dd5
Compare
|
Upstream branch: f9db3a3 |
ce73bd0 to
cd6026d
Compare
2991dd5 to
583dec7
Compare
|
Upstream branch: 8842732 |
cd6026d to
7925e98
Compare
583dec7 to
e224139
Compare
|
Upstream branch: 23f852d |
7925e98 to
730e586
Compare
e224139 to
1f11231
Compare
|
Upstream branch: 54c134f |
730e586 to
dbe2783
Compare
1f11231 to
2563a04
Compare
|
Upstream branch: 9f317bd |
dbe2783 to
f35f048
Compare
2563a04 to
b8a9697
Compare
|
Upstream branch: 54c134f |
Syzbot reported a kernel warning due to a range invariant violation in the BPF verifier. The issue occurs when tnum_overlap() fails to detect that two tnums don't have any overlapping bits. The problematic BPF program: 0: call bpf_get_prandom_u32 1: r6 = r0 2: r6 &= 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF0 3: r7 = r0 4: r7 &= 0x07 5: r7 -= 0xFF 6: if r6 == r7 goto <exit> After instruction 5, R7 has the range: R7: u64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff08] var_off=(0xffffffffffffff00; 0xf) R6 and R7 don't overlap since they have no agreeing bits. However, is_branch_taken() fails to recognize this, causing the verifier to refine register bounds and end up with inconsistent bounds: 6: if r6 == r7 goto <exit> R6: u64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] var_off=(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) R7: u64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] var_off=(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) The root cause is that tnum_overlap() doesn't properly handle the case where the masks have no overlapping bits. Fix this by adding an early check for zero mask intersection in tnum_overlap(). Reported-by: [email protected] Fixes: f41345f ("bpf: Use tnums for JEQ/JNE is_branch_taken logic") Signed-off-by: KaFai Wan <[email protected]>
This patch adds coverage for the warning detected by syzkaller and fixed in the previous patch. Without the previous patch, this test fails with: verifier bug: REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION (true_reg1): range bounds violation u64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] s64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] u32=[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] s32=[0xffffff00, 0xffffff00] var_off=(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) verifier bug: REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION (true_reg2): range bounds violation u64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] s64=[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] u32=[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] s32=[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] var_off=(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) Signed-off-by: KaFai Wan <[email protected]>
f35f048 to
b4d3cb4
Compare
|
At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=1015928 expired. Closing PR. |
Pull request for series with
subject: bpf: Fix tnum_overlap to check for zero mask first
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=1015928