On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 08:02:43PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 10:25:54PM -0800, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > By adding this test to test_verifier:
> > {
> > "reference tracking: access sk->src_ip4 (narrow load)",
> > .insns = {
> > BPF_SK_LOOKUP,
> > BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_0),
> > BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 3),
> > BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0, offsetof(struct bpf_sock,
> > src_ip4) + 2),
> > BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
> > BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_sk_release),
> > BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> > },
> > .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
> > .result = ACCEPT,
> > },
> >
> > The above test loads 2 bytes from sk->src_ip4 where
> > sk is obtained by bpf_sk_lookup_tcp().
> >
> > It hits an internal verifier error from convert_ctx_accesses():
> > [root@arch-fb-vm1 bpf]# ./test_verifier 665 665
> > Failed to load prog 'Invalid argument'!
> > 0: (b7) r2 = 0
> > 1: (63) *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = r2
> > 2: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r2
> > 3: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -24) = r2
> > 4: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -32) = r2
> > 5: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r2
> > 6: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -48) = r2
> > 7: (bf) r2 = r10
> > 8: (07) r2 += -48
> > 9: (b7) r3 = 36
> > 10: (b7) r4 = 0
> > 11: (b7) r5 = 0
> > 12: (85) call bpf_sk_lookup_tcp#84
> > 13: (bf) r6 = r0
> > 14: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+3
> > R0=sock(id=1,off=0,imm=0) R6=sock(id=1,off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0,call_-1
> > fp-8=????0000 fp-16=0000mmmm fp-24=mmmmmmmm fp-32=mmmmmmmm fp-40=mmmmmmmm
> > fp-48=mmmmmmmm refs=1
> > 15: (69) r2 = *(u16 *)(r0 +26)
> > 16: (bf) r1 = r6
> > 17: (85) call bpf_sk_release#86
> > 18: (95) exit
> >
> > from 14 to 18: safe
> > processed 20 insns (limit 131072), stack depth 48
> > bpf verifier is misconfigured
> > Summary: 0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED
> >
> > The bpf_sock_is_valid_access() is expecting src_ip4 can be narrowly
> > loaded (meaning load any 1 or 2 bytes of the src_ip4) by
> > marking info->ctx_field_size. However, this marked
> > ctx_field_size is not used. This patch fixes it.
> >
> > Due to the recent refactoring in test_verifier,
> > this new test will be added to the bpf-next branch
> > (together with the bpf_tcp_sock patchset)
> > to avoid merge conflict.
> >
> > Fixes: c64b7983288e ("bpf: Add PTR_TO_SOCKET verifier type")
> > Cc: Joe Stringer <j...@wand.net.nz>
> > Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <ka...@fb.com>
>
> Applied to bpf tree.
Thanks!
>
> Martin, if your is_fullsock work depends on it, I can apply the fix
> to bpf-next as well. Just let me know.
Yes, the is_fullsock work depends on it.
I should have mentioned it in this commit log.
