On Tue, Dec 7, 2021 at 7:49 PM Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 10:24 PM Andrii Nakryiko > <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Dec 6, 2021 at 3:22 PM Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Some helper functions may modify its arguments, for example, > > > bpf_d_path, bpf_get_stack etc. Previously, their argument types > > > were marked as ARG_PTR_TO_MEM, which is compatible with read-only > > > mem types, such as PTR_TO_RDONLY_BUF. Therefore it's legitimate > > > to modify a read-only memory by passing it into one of such helper > > > functions. > > > > > > This patch tags the bpf_args compatible with immutable memory with > > > MEM_RDONLY flag. The arguments that don't have this flag will be > > > only compatible with mutable memory types, preventing the helper > > > from modifying a read-only memory. The bpf_args that have > > > MEM_RDONLY are compatible with both mutable memory and immutable > > > memory. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > include/linux/bpf.h | 4 ++- > > > kernel/bpf/btf.c | 2 +- > > > kernel/bpf/cgroup.c | 2 +- > > > kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 8 ++--- > > > kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c | 2 +- > > > kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 2 +- > > > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 14 +++++++-- > > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 26 ++++++++-------- > > > net/core/filter.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++-------------------- > > > 9 files changed, 67 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-) > > > [...] > > > @@ -5074,6 +5074,7 @@ static int check_reg_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno, > > > struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env), *reg = ®s[regno]; > > > enum bpf_reg_type expected, type = reg->type; > > > const struct bpf_reg_types *compatible; > > > + u32 compatible_flags; > > > int i, j; > > > > > > compatible = compatible_reg_types[base_type(arg_type)]; > > > @@ -5082,6 +5083,13 @@ static int check_reg_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno, > > > return -EFAULT; > > > } > > > > > > + /* If arg_type is tagged with MEM_RDONLY, it's compatible with both > > > + * RDONLY and non-RDONLY reg values. Therefore fold this flag before > > > + * comparison. PTR_MAYBE_NULL is similar. > > > + */ > > > + compatible_flags = arg_type & (MEM_RDONLY | PTR_MAYBE_NULL); > > > + type &= ~compatible_flags; > > > + > > > > wouldn't > > > > type &= ~MEM_RDONLY; /* clear read-only flag, if any */ > > type &= ~PTR_MAYBE_NULL; /* clear nullable flag, if any */ > > > > be cleaner and more straightforward? > > > > > > No problem. Sounds good to me. > I just realized the suggested transformation is wrong. Whether to fold the flag depends on whether arg_type has the flag. So it should instead be if (arg_type & MEM_RDONLY) type &= ~MEM_RDONLY; or type &= ~(arg_type & MEM_RDONLY); > > > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(compatible->types); i++) { > > > expected = compatible->types[i]; > > > if (expected == NOT_INIT) > > > > [...]