6.6-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know. ------------------ From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> commit 57e2a52deeb12ab84c15c6d0fb93638b5b94001b upstream. Check that even if bpf_loop() callback simulation does not converge to a specific state, verification could proceed via "brute force" simulation of maximal number of callback calls. Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-12-eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c | 75 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 75 insertions(+) --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_iterating_callbacks.c @@ -164,4 +164,79 @@ int unsafe_find_vma(void *unused) return choice_arr[loop_ctx.i]; } +static int iter_limit_cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context *ctx) +{ + ctx->i++; + return 0; +} + +SEC("?raw_tp") +__success +int bpf_loop_iter_limit_ok(void *unused) +{ + struct num_context ctx = { .i = 0 }; + + bpf_loop(1, iter_limit_cb, &ctx, 0); + return choice_arr[ctx.i]; +} + +SEC("?raw_tp") +__failure __msg("invalid access to map value, value_size=2 off=2 size=1") +int bpf_loop_iter_limit_overflow(void *unused) +{ + struct num_context ctx = { .i = 0 }; + + bpf_loop(2, iter_limit_cb, &ctx, 0); + return choice_arr[ctx.i]; +} + +static int iter_limit_level2a_cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context *ctx) +{ + ctx->i += 100; + return 0; +} + +static int iter_limit_level2b_cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context *ctx) +{ + ctx->i += 10; + return 0; +} + +static int iter_limit_level1_cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context *ctx) +{ + ctx->i += 1; + bpf_loop(1, iter_limit_level2a_cb, ctx, 0); + bpf_loop(1, iter_limit_level2b_cb, ctx, 0); + return 0; +} + +/* Check that path visiting every callback function once had been + * reached by verifier. Variables 'ctx{1,2}i' below serve as flags, + * with each decimal digit corresponding to a callback visit marker. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __retval(111111) +int bpf_loop_iter_limit_nested(void *unused) +{ + struct num_context ctx1 = { .i = 0 }; + struct num_context ctx2 = { .i = 0 }; + __u64 a, b, c; + + bpf_loop(1, iter_limit_level1_cb, &ctx1, 0); + bpf_loop(1, iter_limit_level1_cb, &ctx2, 0); + a = ctx1.i; + b = ctx2.i; + /* Force 'ctx1.i' and 'ctx2.i' precise. */ + c = choice_arr[(a + b) % 2]; + /* This makes 'c' zero, but neither clang nor verifier know it. */ + c /= 10; + /* Make sure that verifier does not visit 'impossible' states: + * enumerate all possible callback visit masks. + */ + if (a != 0 && a != 1 && a != 11 && a != 101 && a != 111 && + b != 0 && b != 1 && b != 11 && b != 101 && b != 111) + asm volatile ("r0 /= 0;" ::: "r0"); + return 1000 * a + b + c; +} + char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
