On Fri, Sep 6, 2024 at 3:57 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 6 Sep 2024 15:41:47 -0700 Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > The urgency is now because the situation is dire.
> > The verifier assumes that skb is not null and will remove
> > if (!skb) check assuming that it's a dead code.
>
> Meaning verifier currently isn't ready for patch 4?
> Or we can crash 6.11-rc6 by attaching to a trace_tcp_send_reset()
> and doing
> printf("%d\n", skb->len);
> ?
depends on the prog type and how it's attached, but yes :(
Without Philo's patches.
It was reported here:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZrCZS6nisraEqehw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
Jiri did the analysis. These files would need to be annotated:
include/trace/events/afs.h
include/trace/events/cachefiles.h
include/trace/events/ext4.h
include/trace/events/fib.h
include/trace/events/filelock.h
include/trace/events/host1x.h
include/trace/events/huge_memory.h
include/trace/events/kmem.h
include/trace/events/netfs.h
include/trace/events/power.h
include/trace/events/qdisc.h
include/trace/events/rxrpc.h
include/trace/events/sched.h
include/trace/events/sunrpc.h
include/trace/events/tcp.h
include/trace/events/tegra_apb_dma.h
include/trace/events/timer_migration.h
include/trace/events/writeback.h
which is 18 out of 160.
All other options are worse.
