In 568f196756ad ("bpf: check that BPF programs run with preemption disabled")
a check was added for BPF_PROG_RUN() that for every invocation preemption has
to be disabled to not break eBPF assumptions (e.g. per-cpu map). Of course this
does not count for seccomp because only cBPF -> eBPF is loaded here and it does
not make use of any functionality that would require this assertion. Fix this
false positive by adding and using __BPF_PROG_RUN() variant that does not have
the cant_sleep(); check.
Fixes: 568f196756ad ("bpf: check that BPF programs run with preemption
disabled")
Reported-by: syzbot+8bf19ee2aa580de7a...@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net>
---
include/linux/filter.h | 9 ++++++++-
kernel/seccomp.c | 2 +-
2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
index f32b3ec..2648fd7 100644
--- a/include/linux/filter.h
+++ b/include/linux/filter.h
@@ -533,7 +533,14 @@ struct sk_filter {
struct bpf_prog *prog;
};
-#define BPF_PROG_RUN(filter, ctx) ({ cant_sleep(); (*(filter)->bpf_func)(ctx,
(filter)->insnsi); })
+#define bpf_prog_run__non_preempt(prog, ctx) \
+ ({ cant_sleep(); __BPF_PROG_RUN(prog, ctx); })
+/* Native eBPF or cBPF -> eBPF transitions. Preemption must be disabled. */
+#define BPF_PROG_RUN(prog, ctx) \
+ bpf_prog_run__non_preempt(prog, ctx)
+/* Direct use for cBPF -> eBPF only, but not for native eBPF. */
+#define __BPF_PROG_RUN(prog, ctx) \
+ (*(prog)->bpf_func)(ctx, (prog)->insnsi)
#define BPF_SKB_CB_LEN QDISC_CB_PRIV_LEN
diff --git a/kernel/seccomp.c b/kernel/seccomp.c
index e815781..826d4e4 100644
--- a/kernel/seccomp.c
+++ b/kernel/seccomp.c
@@ -268,7 +268,7 @@ static u32 seccomp_run_filters(const struct seccomp_data
*sd,
* value always takes priority (ignoring the DATA).
*/
for (; f; f = f->prev) {
- u32 cur_ret = BPF_PROG_RUN(f->prog, sd);
+ u32 cur_ret = __BPF_PROG_RUN(f->prog, sd);
if (ACTION_ONLY(cur_ret) < ACTION_ONLY(ret)) {
ret = cur_ret;
--
2.9.5
