6.9-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 1479eaff1f16983d8fda7c5a08a586c21891087d ]
Test case dummy_st_ops/dummy_init_ret_value passes NULL as the first
parameter of the test_1() function. Mark this parameter as nullable to
make verifier aware of such possibility.
Otherwise, NULL check in the test_1() code:
SEC("struct_ops/test_1")
int BPF_PROG(test_1, struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state)
{
if (!state)
return ...;
... access state ...
}
Might be removed by verifier, thus triggering NULL pointer dereference
under certain conditions.
Reported-by: Jose E. Marchesi <jemarch@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240424012821.595216-2-eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c b/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
index de33dc1b0daad..fdbe30ad8db2f 100644
--- a/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
+++ b/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@ static void bpf_dummy_unreg(void *kdata)
{
}
-static int bpf_dummy_test_1(struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *cb)
+static int bpf_dummy_ops__test_1(struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *cb__nullable)
{
return 0;
}
@@ -247,7 +247,7 @@ static int bpf_dummy_test_sleepable(struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *cb)
}
static struct bpf_dummy_ops __bpf_bpf_dummy_ops = {
- .test_1 = bpf_dummy_test_1,
+ .test_1 = bpf_dummy_ops__test_1,
.test_2 = bpf_dummy_test_2,
.test_sleepable = bpf_dummy_test_sleepable,
};
--
2.43.0
