summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorYonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>2017-04-30 05:52:42 (GMT)
committerGreg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>2017-05-14 12:00:20 (GMT)
commit7bca0a9702edfc8d0e7e46f984ca422ffdbe0498 (patch)
tree0ba7e16e8d344286ab284b4c4e5cc83a3c81e46f /kernel/bpf/verifier.c
parentf3235cbd5be15aa084d5561c2eb8492ed68cd7e5 (diff)
downloadlinux-7bca0a9702edfc8d0e7e46f984ca422ffdbe0498.tar.xz
bpf: enhance verifier to understand stack pointer arithmetic
[ Upstream commit 332270fdc8b6fba07d059a9ad44df9e1a2ad4529 ] llvm 4.0 and above generates the code like below: .... 440: (b7) r1 = 15 441: (05) goto pc+73 515: (79) r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -152) 516: (bf) r7 = r10 517: (07) r7 += -112 518: (bf) r2 = r7 519: (0f) r2 += r1 520: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r8 +0) 521: (73) *(u8 *)(r2 +45) = r1 .... and the verifier complains "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'" for insn #521. This is because verifier marks register r2 as unknown value after #519 where r2 is a stack pointer and r1 holds a constant value. Teach verifier to recognize "stack_ptr + imm" and "stack_ptr + reg with const val" as valid stack_ptr with new offset. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'kernel/bpf/verifier.c')
-rw-r--r--kernel/bpf/verifier.c11
1 files changed, 11 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 7c9f94c..64fcab1 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1749,6 +1749,17 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return 0;
} else if (opcode == BPF_ADD &&
BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64 &&
+ dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_STACK &&
+ ((BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X &&
+ regs[insn->src_reg].type == CONST_IMM) ||
+ BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_K)) {
+ if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X)
+ dst_reg->imm += regs[insn->src_reg].imm;
+ else
+ dst_reg->imm += insn->imm;
+ return 0;
+ } else if (opcode == BPF_ADD &&
+ BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64 &&
(dst_reg->type == PTR_TO_PACKET ||
(BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_X &&
regs[insn->src_reg].type == PTR_TO_PACKET))) {