On Fri, Aug 26, 2022 at 3:55 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
<memxor@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2022 at 15:41, Benjamin Tissoires
> <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > The purpose of this clear is to prevent meta->raw_mode to be evaluated
> > at true, but this also prevents to forward any other data to the other
> > callees.
> >
> > Only switch back raw_mode to false so we don't entirely clear meta.
> >
> > Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > ---
> >
> > no changes in v9
> >
> > no changes in v8
> >
> > no changes in v7
> >
> > new in v6
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index d694f43ab911..13190487fb12 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -5287,7 +5287,7 @@ static int check_mem_size_reg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > * initialize all the memory that the helper could
> > * just partially fill up.
> > */
> > - meta = NULL;
> > + meta->raw_mode = false;
>
> But this is adding a side effect, the caller's meta->raw_mode becomes
> false, which the caller may not expect...
Turns out that I don't need that patch anymore because I am not
checking against is_kfunc in the previous patch. So dropping it from
the next revision.
Cheers,
Benjamin
>
> >
> > if (reg->smin_value < 0) {
> > verbose(env, "R%d min value is negative, either use unsigned or 'var &= const'\n",
> > --
> > 2.36.1
> >
>
