Skip to content

Commit 7af6f8e

Browse files
anakryikoKernel Patches Daemon
authored and
Kernel Patches Daemon
committed
bpf: enhance BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE is_branch_taken logic
Use 32-bit subranges to prune some 64-bit BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE conditions that otherwise would be "inconclusive" (i.e., is_branch_taken() would return -1). This can happen, for example, when registers are initialized as 64-bit u64/s64, then compared for inequality as 32-bit subregisters, and then followed by 64-bit equality/inequality check. That 32-bit inequality can establish some pattern for lower 32 bits of a register (e.g., s< 0 condition determines whether the bit #31 is zero or not), while overall 64-bit value could be anything (according to a value range representation). This is not a fancy quirky special case, but actually a handling that's necessary to prevent correctness issue with BPF verifier's range tracking: set_range_min_max() assumes that register ranges are non-overlapping, and if that condition is not guaranteed by is_branch_taken() we can end up with invalid ranges, where min > max. [0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CACkBjsY2q1_fUohD7hRmKGqv1MV=eP2f6XK8kjkYNw7BaiF8iQ@mail.gmail.com/ Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <[email protected]> Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
1 parent 74a12ef commit 7af6f8e

File tree

1 file changed

+24
-0
lines changed

1 file changed

+24
-0
lines changed

kernel/bpf/verifier.c

Lines changed: 24 additions & 0 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -14283,6 +14283,18 @@ static int is_scalar_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, struct bpf_reg_sta
1428314283
return 0;
1428414284
if (smin1 > smax2 || smax1 < smin2)
1428514285
return 0;
14286+
if (!is_jmp32) {
14287+
/* if 64-bit ranges are inconclusive, see if we can
14288+
* utilize 32-bit subrange knowledge to eliminate
14289+
* branches that can't be taken a priori
14290+
*/
14291+
if (reg1->u32_min_value > reg2->u32_max_value ||
14292+
reg1->u32_max_value < reg2->u32_min_value)
14293+
return 0;
14294+
if (reg1->s32_min_value > reg2->s32_max_value ||
14295+
reg1->s32_max_value < reg2->s32_min_value)
14296+
return 0;
14297+
}
1428614298
break;
1428714299
case BPF_JNE:
1428814300
/* constants, umin/umax and smin/smax checks would be
@@ -14295,6 +14307,18 @@ static int is_scalar_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, struct bpf_reg_sta
1429514307
return 1;
1429614308
if (smin1 > smax2 || smax1 < smin2)
1429714309
return 1;
14310+
if (!is_jmp32) {
14311+
/* if 64-bit ranges are inconclusive, see if we can
14312+
* utilize 32-bit subrange knowledge to eliminate
14313+
* branches that can't be taken a priori
14314+
*/
14315+
if (reg1->u32_min_value > reg2->u32_max_value ||
14316+
reg1->u32_max_value < reg2->u32_min_value)
14317+
return 1;
14318+
if (reg1->s32_min_value > reg2->s32_max_value ||
14319+
reg1->s32_max_value < reg2->s32_min_value)
14320+
return 1;
14321+
}
1429814322
break;
1429914323
case BPF_JSET:
1430014324
if (!is_reg_const(reg2, is_jmp32)) {

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)