From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com, sunhao.th@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v3 0/2] bpf: fix verification of indirect var-off stack access
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2023 19:14:13 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1cf2fe9a679946a05fac869299a4f37272485a3f.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CABWLsevo3JDGti3c8guAm8vphUT+13aoMCibiN8EDYpcKmafAA@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, 2023-12-06 at 11:57 -0500, Andrei Matei wrote:
[...]
> > I think we also need a selftest, at-least for patch #1.
>
> Yeah... I was wondering in a message on v1 [1] if a test like what I had
> prototyped there was warranted. I personally still think it's not because of
> how many other variations of variable-offset stack access tests we already
> have, and how random the zero-sized read case is (even though we had a bug in
> there) - so protecting against this particular regression didn't seem worth it
> to me. I'm now including the test in v4 but if you change your mind about it
> when you see it in context, let me know and I'll take it out.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CABWLsevk47Xa1a+h0UK--94zEuxScrmyt0-D8YShq1UgvVvf5g@mail.gmail.com/
The reproducer is a small and non-contrived program, so I think there
is no harm in adding it.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-06 17:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-05 19:32 [PATCH bpf v3 0/2] bpf: fix verification of indirect var-off stack access Andrei Matei
2023-12-05 19:32 ` [PATCH bpf v3 1/2] " Andrei Matei
2023-12-06 0:27 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-12-05 19:32 ` [PATCH bpf v3 2/2] bpf: guard stack limits against 32bit overflow Andrei Matei
2023-12-05 23:35 ` [PATCH bpf v3 0/2] bpf: fix verification of indirect var-off stack access Eduard Zingerman
2023-12-06 0:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-12-06 16:57 ` Andrei Matei
2023-12-06 17:14 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
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=1cf2fe9a679946a05fac869299a4f37272485a3f.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andreimatei1@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sunhao.th@gmail.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox