On Mon, Dec 18, 2023 at 09:56:38AM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Sun, Dec 17, 2023 at 1:55 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Currently the __uprobe_register will return 0 (success) when called with > > negative offset. The reason is that the call to register_for_each_vma and > > then build_map_info won't return error for negative offset. They just won't > > do anything - no matching vma is found so there's no registered breakpoint > > for the uprobe. > > > > I don't think we can change the behaviour of __uprobe_register and fail > > for negative uprobe offset, because apps might depend on that already. > > > > But I think we can still make the change and check for it on bpf multi > > link syscall level. > > > > Also moving the __get_user call and check for the offsets to the top of > > loop, to fail early without extra __get_user calls for ref_ctr_offset > > and cookie arrays. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > index 97c0c49c40a0..492d60e9c480 100644 > > --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > @@ -3391,15 +3391,19 @@ int bpf_uprobe_multi_link_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *pr > > goto error_free; > > > > for (i = 0; i < cnt; i++) { > > - if (ucookies && __get_user(uprobes[i].cookie, ucookies + i)) { > > + if (__get_user(uprobes[i].offset, uoffsets + i)) { > > err = -EFAULT; > > goto error_free; > > } > > + if (uprobes[i].offset < 0) { > > + err = -EINVAL; > > + goto error_free; > > + } > > I applied this because it does fix the problem, but the whole > reshuffle of offsets in front of cookies is pointless, because of the > common for() loop. You are saving one or two __get_user() calls before > failing. > > If we really want to do validation first, reading offsets should be in > its own for loop, then uref_ctr_offsets in its own, and then cookies > in its own loop as well. That way we read and validate the entire > array before reading another array. Please consider a follow up, if > you think it's important enough. ok, thanks jirka > > > > if (uref_ctr_offsets && __get_user(uprobes[i].ref_ctr_offset, uref_ctr_offsets + i)) { > > err = -EFAULT; > > goto error_free; > > } > > - if (__get_user(uprobes[i].offset, uoffsets + i)) { > > + if (ucookies && __get_user(uprobes[i].cookie, ucookies + i)) { > > err = -EFAULT; > > goto error_free; > > } > > -- > > 2.43.0 > >