From d2f790327f83b457db357e7c66f942bc00d43462 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Daniel Borkmann Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2021 18:53:39 +0300 Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Do not mark insn as seen under speculative path verification commit fe9a5ca7e370e613a9a75a13008a3845ea759d6e upstream ... in such circumstances, we do not want to mark the instruction as seen given the goal is still to jmp-1 rewrite/sanitize dead code, if it is not reachable from the non-speculative path verification. We do however want to verify it for safety regardless. With the patch as-is all the insns that have been marked as seen before the patch will also be marked as seen after the patch (just with a potentially different non-zero count). An upcoming patch will also verify paths that are unreachable in the non-speculative domain, hence this extension is needed. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Reviewed-by: Benedict Schlueter Reviewed-by: Piotr Krysiuk Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov [OP: - env->pass_cnt is not used in 5.4, so adjust sanitize_mark_insn_seen() to assign "true" instead - drop sanitize_insn_aux_data() comment changes, as the function is not present in 5.4] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 17 +++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 526e52f45ab3..02a04a30070b 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -4435,6 +4435,19 @@ do_sim: return !ret ? REASON_STACK : 0; } +static void sanitize_mark_insn_seen(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) +{ + struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state; + + /* If we simulate paths under speculation, we don't update the + * insn as 'seen' such that when we verify unreachable paths in + * the non-speculative domain, sanitize_dead_code() can still + * rewrite/sanitize them. + */ + if (!vstate->speculative) + env->insn_aux_data[env->insn_idx].seen = true; +} + static int sanitize_err(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const struct bpf_insn *insn, int reason, const struct bpf_reg_state *off_reg, @@ -7790,7 +7803,7 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) } regs = cur_regs(env); - env->insn_aux_data[env->insn_idx].seen = true; + sanitize_mark_insn_seen(env); prev_insn_idx = env->insn_idx; if (class == BPF_ALU || class == BPF_ALU64) { @@ -8025,7 +8038,7 @@ process_bpf_exit: return err; env->insn_idx++; - env->insn_aux_data[env->insn_idx].seen = true; + sanitize_mark_insn_seen(env); } else { verbose(env, "invalid BPF_LD mode\n"); return -EINVAL;