From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> As per the earlier patches, BPF sub-programs have bpf_callback_t signature and CFI expects callers to have matching signature. This is violated by bpf_prog_aux::bpf_exception_cb(). [peterz: Changelog] Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/CAADnVQ+Z7UcXXBBhMubhcMM=R-dExk-uHtfOLtoLxQ1XxEpqEA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx --- include/linux/bpf.h | 2 +- kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) --- a/include/linux/bpf.h +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h @@ -1484,7 +1484,7 @@ struct bpf_prog_aux { int cgroup_atype; /* enum cgroup_bpf_attach_type */ struct bpf_map *cgroup_storage[MAX_BPF_CGROUP_STORAGE_TYPE]; char name[BPF_OBJ_NAME_LEN]; - unsigned int (*bpf_exception_cb)(u64 cookie, u64 sp, u64 bp); + u64 (*bpf_exception_cb)(u64 cookie, u64 sp, u64 bp, u64, u64); #ifdef CONFIG_SECURITY void *security; #endif --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c @@ -2537,7 +2537,7 @@ __bpf_kfunc void bpf_throw(u64 cookie) * which skips compiler generated instrumentation to do the same. */ kasan_unpoison_task_stack_below((void *)(long)ctx.sp); - ctx.aux->bpf_exception_cb(cookie, ctx.sp, ctx.bp); + ctx.aux->bpf_exception_cb(cookie, ctx.sp, ctx.bp, 0, 0); WARN(1, "A call to BPF exception callback should never return\n"); }
