From: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
To: Yiyang Chen <chenyy23@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>
Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] bpf: Preserve stack frame number for commuted arithmetic
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2026 16:46:30 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <amB_My3Pg2hIxRG7@u94a> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <976ae2fbf6f2ead76622e39813bfda6a6981d382.camel@gmail.com>
On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 05:12:14PM -0700, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2026-07-21 at 09:39 +0000, Yiyang Chen wrote:
> > When scalar += pointer is handled in adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(), the
> > destination register has to inherit the pointer register state from the
> > source pointer. Copying only selected fields is fragile because pointer
> > provenance is tracked by several bpf_reg_state fields.
> >
> > For the commuted form, pass a temporary scalar offset register to the
> > common pointer arithmetic helper and copy the full pointer state before
> > applying pointer arithmetic. This preserves the frame number for
> > PTR_TO_STACK registers and keeps parent identity fields consistent.
> >
> > Fixes: f1174f77b50c ("bpf/verifier: rework value tracking")
This doesn't look right. Without bpf2bpf there is just one frame, hence
there isn't a bug at this point. I think the commit f4d7e40a5b71 ("bpf:
introduce function calls (verification)") the you mentioned in v1 should
be used here instead.
Ideally there should be a second tag for the missed parent_id
preservation issue for invalidating dynptr mentioned by Sashiko, too.
But it wasn't that obvious where that issue was introduced to me, and
f4d7e40a5b71 pre-dates dynptr anyway.
> > Signed-off-by: Yiyang Chen <chenyy23@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn>
> > ---
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 14 +++++++++-----
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index 52be0a118cce0..3c0af83db4672 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -13796,11 +13796,12 @@ static int adjust_ptr_min_max_vals(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> > return -EACCES;
> > }
> >
> > - /* In case of 'scalar += pointer', dst_reg inherits pointer type and id.
> > - * The id may be overwritten later if we create a new variable offset.
> > + /* For 'scalar += pointer', dst_reg inherits the complete pointer
> > + * register state. Individual fields may be adjusted later by pointer
> > + * arithmetic.
> > */
> > - dst_reg->type = ptr_reg->type;
> > - dst_reg->id = ptr_reg->id;
> > + if (ptr_reg != dst_reg)
> > + *dst_reg = *ptr_reg;
>
> Lot's of tests are failing on the CI, please investigate.
I think one reason is that this overwrites r64 and var_off, hence in the
scalar += pointer case, we're adding the existing offset in ptr_reg to
itself, equivalent to:
dst_reg->r64 = cnum64_add(ptr_reg->r64, ptr_reg->r64);
dst_reg->var_off = tnum_add(ptr_reg->var_off, ptr_reg->var_off);
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-22 8:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-21 9:39 [bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Preserve stack frame number for commuted arithmetic Yiyang Chen
2026-07-21 9:39 ` [PATCH 1/2] " Yiyang Chen
2026-07-21 9:48 ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-22 7:44 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2026-07-22 0:12 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-22 8:46 ` Shung-Hsi Yu [this message]
2026-07-21 9:39 ` [PATCH 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover stack frame number after scalar plus fp Yiyang Chen
2026-07-21 10:29 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-21 23:53 ` Eduard Zingerman
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=amB_My3Pg2hIxRG7@u94a \
--to=shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenyy23@mails.tsinghua.edu.cn \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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.