+37
−1
Loading
Merge branch 'bpf-support-to-track-bpf_jne'
Menglong Dong says:
====================
bpf: support to track BPF_JNE
For now, the reg bounds is not handled for BPF_JNE case, which can cause
the failure of following case:
/* 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 "if a == 0 goto xxx". 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].
In the 1st patch, we reduce the range of the dst reg if the src reg is a
const and is exactly the edge of the dst reg For BPF_JNE.
In the 2nd patch, we remove reduplicated s32 casting in "crafted_cases".
In the 3rd patch, we just activate the test case for this logic in
range_cond(), which is committed by Andrii in the
commit 88632389 ("selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester").
In the 4th patch, we convert the case above to a testcase and add it to
verifier_bounds.c.
Changes since v4:
- add the 2nd patch
- add "{U32, U32, {0, U32_MAX}, {U32_MAX, U32_MAX}}" that we missed in the
3rd patch
- add some comments to the function that we add in the 4th patch
- add reg_not_equal_const() in the 4th patch
Changes since v3:
- do some adjustment to the crafted cases that we added in the 2nd patch
- add the 3rd patch
Changes since v2:
- fix a typo in the subject of the 1st patch
- add some comments to the 1st patch, as Eduard advised
- add some cases to the "crafted_cases"
Changes since v1:
- simplify the code in the 1st patch
- introduce the 2nd patch for the testing
====================
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231219134800.1550388-1-menglong8.dong@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: 
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>