[PATCH 6.6 066/269] bpf, verifier: Correct tail_call_reachable for bpf prog

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



6.6-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx>

[ Upstream commit 01793ed86b5d7df1e956520b5474940743eb7ed8 ]

It's confusing to inspect 'prog->aux->tail_call_reachable' with drgn[0],
when bpf prog has tail call but 'tail_call_reachable' is false.

This patch corrects 'tail_call_reachable' when bpf prog has tail call.

Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240610124224.34673-2-hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 +++-
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 3f1a9cd7fc9e..9d5699942273 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -3064,8 +3064,10 @@ static int check_subprogs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 
 		if (code == (BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL) &&
 		    insn[i].src_reg == 0 &&
-		    insn[i].imm == BPF_FUNC_tail_call)
+		    insn[i].imm == BPF_FUNC_tail_call) {
 			subprog[cur_subprog].has_tail_call = true;
+			subprog[cur_subprog].tail_call_reachable = true;
+		}
 		if (BPF_CLASS(code) == BPF_LD &&
 		    (BPF_MODE(code) == BPF_ABS || BPF_MODE(code) == BPF_IND))
 			subprog[cur_subprog].has_ld_abs = true;
-- 
2.43.0







[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Development Newbies]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite Hiking]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux