Re: [RFC bpf-next 2/5] bpf: Handle BPF_KPTR_USER in verifier.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Aug 13, 2024 at 9:52 AM Kui-Feng Lee <sinquersw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/12/24 09:48, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 7, 2024 at 4:58 PM Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> Give PTR_MAYBE_NULL | PTR_UNTRUSTED | MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF to kptr_user
> >> to the memory pointed by it readable and writable.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >>   kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 11 +++++++++++
> >>   1 file changed, 11 insertions(+)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> >> index df3be12096cf..84647e599595 100644
> >> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> >> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> >> @@ -5340,6 +5340,10 @@ static int map_kptr_match_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> >>          int perm_flags;
> >>          const char *reg_name = "";
> >>
> >> +       if (kptr_field->type == BPF_KPTR_USER)
> >> +               /* BPF programs should not change any user kptr */
> >> +               return -EACCES;
> >> +
> >>          if (btf_is_kernel(reg->btf)) {
> >>                  perm_flags = PTR_MAYBE_NULL | PTR_TRUSTED | MEM_RCU;
> >>
> >> @@ -5483,6 +5487,12 @@ static u32 btf_ld_kptr_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct btf_field *kptr
> >>                          ret |= NON_OWN_REF;
> >>          } else {
> >>                  ret |= PTR_UNTRUSTED;
> >> +               if (kptr_field->type == BPF_KPTR_USER)
> >> +                       /* In oder to access directly from bpf
> >> +                        * programs. NON_OWN_REF make the memory
> >> +                        * writable. Check check_ptr_to_btf_access().
> >> +                        */
> >> +                       ret |= MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF;
> >
> > UNTRUSTED | MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF ?!
> >
> > That doesn't fit into any of the existing verifier schemes.
> > I cannot make sense of this part.
> >
> > UNTRUSTED | MEM_ALLOC is read only through exceptions logic.
> > The uptr has to be read/write through normal load/store.
>
> I will remove UNTRUSTED and leave MEM_ALLOC and NON_OWN_REF.
> Does it make sense to you?

I don't think it fits either.
MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF is specific to bpf_rbtree/linklist nodes.
There are various checks and logic like:
1.
      if (!(type_is_ptr_alloc_obj(reg->type) ||
type_is_non_owning_ref(reg->type)) &&
            WARN_ON_ONCE(reg->off))
          return;
2.
invalidate_non_owning_refs() during unlock

that shouldn't apply in this case.

PTR_TO_MEM with specific mem_size fits better.
Since it's user/kernel shared memory PTR_TO_BTF_ID logic with field walking
won't work anyway, so opaque array of bytes is better. Which is PTR_TO_MEM.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux