From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 bpf-next 01/11] bpf: Factor stackid_init function from __bpf_get_stackid
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 08:51:36 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260729085136.9E9B71F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260729083807.1588544-2-jolsa@kernel.org>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
Pre-existing issues:
- [High] A TOCTOU race with `sysctl_perf_event_max_stack` causes an integer underflow in the `max_depth - skip` calculation, leading to a massive heap buffer overflow when copying stack traces.
--
--- Patch [1]: [PATCHv2 bpf-next 01/11] bpf: Factor stackid_init function from __bpf_get_stackid ---
commit 94626e7c900d701c2d2326e06f48ebc28e1f6e93
Author: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
bpf: Factor stackid_init function from __bpf_get_stackid
The new stackid_init function stores all the necessary bits for stackid
trace and it will be used by other functions in following changes.
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> index 41fe87d7302f2..0eafe55b18289 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> @@ -504,33 +504,54 @@ get_callchain_entry_for_task(struct task_struct *task, u32 max_depth)
[ ... ]
> +static int stackid_init(struct stackid *stackid, struct bpf_map *map,
> + struct perf_callchain_entry *trace, u64 flags)
> {
> struct bpf_stack_map *smap = container_of(map, struct bpf_stack_map, map);
> - struct stack_map_bucket *bucket, *new_bucket, *old_bucket;
> - u32 hash, id, trace_nr, trace_len, i, max_depth;
> u32 skip = flags & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK;
> - bool user = flags & BPF_F_USER_STACK;
> - u64 *ips;
> - bool hash_matches;
> + u32 max_depth;
>
> if (trace->nr <= skip)
> /* skipping more than usable stack trace */
> return -EFAULT;
>
> max_depth = stack_map_calculate_max_depth(map->value_size, stack_map_data_size(map), flags);
> - trace_nr = min_t(u32, trace->nr - skip, max_depth - skip);
> - trace_len = trace_nr * sizeof(u64);
> - ips = trace->ip + skip;
> - hash = jhash2((u32 *)ips, trace_len / sizeof(u32), 0);
> - id = hash & (smap->n_buckets - 1);
> - bucket = READ_ONCE(smap->buckets[id]);
> + stackid->nr = min_t(u32, trace->nr - skip, max_depth - skip);
[Severity: High]
This is a pre-existing issue, but can this max_depth - skip calculation
underflow?
If a BPF program is attached to a perf event using bpf_get_stackid_pe(),
the callchain is generated using the current sysctl_perf_event_max_stack
limit. If an administrator concurrently reduces sysctl_perf_event_max_stack to
a value smaller than the skip parameter, stack_map_calculate_max_depth()
clamps max_depth to this new smaller sysctl value:
kernel/bpf/stackmap.c:stack_map_calculate_max_depth() {
...
u32 curr_sysctl_max_stack = READ_ONCE(sysctl_perf_event_max_stack);
...
if (max_depth > curr_sysctl_max_stack)
return curr_sysctl_max_stack;
return max_depth;
}
This would cause max_depth - skip to underflow into a huge u32 value. Since
min_t() is used with u32, a large trace->nr - skip could be selected, which
might exceed the stackmap bucket capacity and lead to a heap buffer overflow
when copying the stack trace later in __bpf_get_stackid():
memcpy(new_bucket->data, stackid->ips, stackid->len);
Does this sequence need to be protected against sysctl changes between trace
gathering and max_depth calculation?
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260729083807.1588544-2-jolsa@kernel.org?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 8:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 8:37 [PATCHv2 bpf-next 00/11] bpf: Disable preemption in stack map code Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:37 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 01/11] bpf: Factor stackid_init function from __bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:51 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-07-29 8:37 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 02/11] bpf: Factor stackid_fastpath " Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:37 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 03/11] bpf: Factor stackid_new_bucket " Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 04/11] bpf: Use stack id functions instead of __bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 9:42 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 05/11] bpf: Disable preemption in bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 10:30 ` Leon Hwang
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 06/11] bpf: Factor callchain_store function from __bpf_get_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:57 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 07/11] bpf: Factor callchain_finalize " Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 9:41 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 08/11] bpf: Restore trace->nr value properly in bpf_get_stack_pe Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 09/11] bpf: Remove trace_in argument from __bpf_get_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 9:58 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 10/11] bpf: Disable preemption in __bpf_get_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 8:38 ` [PATCHv2 bpf-next 11/11] bpf: Clear buf on error in __bpf_get_task_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-07-29 9:57 ` bot+bpf-ci
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20260729085136.9E9B71F000E9@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.