lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Aug]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH v5 net-next 08/12] selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier
Date
A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling.
For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four
bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit,
causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give
us any reg->range).
Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of
mask 0xffff.

Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 0691494..876b878 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -2330,8 +2330,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 48),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 48),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 8),
@@ -2710,11 +2710,11 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0xffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0x7fff),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0xffff - 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff - 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
@@ -2736,10 +2736,10 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_4, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -8),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_4, 0xffff),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0xffff - 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff - 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
@@ -2765,7 +2765,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_4, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -8),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_4, 48),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_4, 49),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 2),
@@ -2820,7 +2820,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0),
- BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0xffff - 1),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x7fff - 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-08-07 16:29    [W:0.120 / U:2.560 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site