Patch "bpf: Fix subprog idx logic in check_max_stack_depth" has been added to the 6.4-stable tree

[Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>]

This is a note to let you know that I've just added the patch titled

    bpf: Fix subprog idx logic in check_max_stack_depth

to the 6.4-stable tree which can be found at:
    http://www.kernel.org/git/?p=linux/kernel/git/stable/stable-queue.git;a=summary

The filename of the patch is:
     bpf-fix-subprog-idx-logic-in-check_max_stack_depth.patch
and it can be found in the queue-6.4 subdirectory.

If you, or anyone else, feels it should not be added to the stable tree,
please let <stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> know about it.



commit 0903ef6dae667052bd2e2b5f70fd8d93583fd8fc
Author: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx>
Date:   Mon Jul 17 21:45:28 2023 +0530

    bpf: Fix subprog idx logic in check_max_stack_depth
    
    [ Upstream commit ba7b3e7d5f9014be65879ede8fd599cb222901c9 ]
    
    The assignment to idx in check_max_stack_depth happens once we see a
    bpf_pseudo_call or bpf_pseudo_func. This is not an issue as the rest of
    the code performs a few checks and then pushes the frame to the frame
    stack, except the case of async callbacks. If the async callback case
    causes the loop iteration to be skipped, the idx assignment will be
    incorrect on the next iteration of the loop. The value stored in the
    frame stack (as the subprogno of the current subprog) will be incorrect.
    
    This leads to incorrect checks and incorrect tail_call_reachable
    marking. Save the target subprog in a new variable and only assign to
    idx once we are done with the is_async_cb check which may skip pushing
    of frame to the frame stack and subsequent stack depth checks and tail
    call markings.
    
    Fixes: 7ddc80a476c2 ("bpf: Teach stack depth check about async callbacks.")
    Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx>
    Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230717161530.1238-2-memxor@xxxxxxxxx
    Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
    Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index aac31e33323bb..e95bfe45fd890 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -5429,7 +5429,7 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 continue_func:
 	subprog_end = subprog[idx + 1].start;
 	for (; i < subprog_end; i++) {
-		int next_insn;
+		int next_insn, sidx;
 
 		if (!bpf_pseudo_call(insn + i) && !bpf_pseudo_func(insn + i))
 			continue;
@@ -5439,14 +5439,14 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 
 		/* find the callee */
 		next_insn = i + insn[i].imm + 1;
-		idx = find_subprog(env, next_insn);
-		if (idx < 0) {
+		sidx = find_subprog(env, next_insn);
+		if (sidx < 0) {
 			WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier bug. No program starts at insn %d\n",
 				  next_insn);
 			return -EFAULT;
 		}
-		if (subprog[idx].is_async_cb) {
-			if (subprog[idx].has_tail_call) {
+		if (subprog[sidx].is_async_cb) {
+			if (subprog[sidx].has_tail_call) {
 				verbose(env, "verifier bug. subprog has tail_call and async cb\n");
 				return -EFAULT;
 			}
@@ -5455,6 +5455,7 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 				continue;
 		}
 		i = next_insn;
+		idx = sidx;
 
 		if (subprog[idx].has_tail_call)
 			tail_call_reachable = true;