On 3/15/24 2:11 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
On 3/15/24 1:55 PM, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
On 3/15/24 10:06 AM, Christophe Leroy wrote:
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
index 43356faaa057..ca1d9b87c475 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
@@ -742,8 +742,11 @@ static long bpf_struct_ops_map_update_elem(struct
bpf_map *map, void *key,
if (err)
goto reset_unlock;
}
- for (i = 0; i < st_map->image_pages_cnt; i++)
- arch_protect_bpf_trampoline(st_map->image_pages[i], PAGE_SIZE);
+ for (i = 0; i < st_map->image_pages_cnt && !err; i++)
I was about to apply but I still think checking "&& !err" is not right given how
"err" is used in the earlier code of this function.
The err may not be 0 in the first iteration of this for loop. Take a look at the
"if (err > 0)" check in the "for_each_member(i, t, member)" loop above.
+ err = arch_protect_bpf_trampoline(st_map->image_pages[i], PAGE_SIZE);
+
+ if (err)
+ goto reset_unlock;
This part does not look right. The "if (err)" check should be inside the for
loop.
Instead of adding an extra "err = 0;" before the for loop. It is better to move
this "if (err) goto reset_unlock;" into the for loop and remove the "&& !err"
test above.
ah. Please ignore. missed the "!err" in the for loop.
