From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B534EC433FE for ; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 19:35:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234042AbiKKTfT (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Nov 2022 14:35:19 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:36606 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233965AbiKKTfS (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Nov 2022 14:35:18 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-x544.google.com (mail-pg1-x544.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::544]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F9BC3E0B6; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:35:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pg1-x544.google.com with SMTP id 78so5107625pgb.13; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:35:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wa0u9WjMdfrDtoNQdvxz75RgHs0C3nrrN8jlNPdiCpI=; b=FXRDGik8x+lnhkLZYjwd4P2vPsErIfLDnuYSpWOWbmZknmalveMDes7PnK/Z/F7fJE HYfirBSKQCGMigGXGf1eXgjYMh8jWQAxj8E3W/MpPzPIYDDhyVajloLxc24wDK5tya+9 o5XphFDEovZnsOS794ScV8AlAdNZqMyh2H+GgtQexiNhc8AHk4q4FkoemaToCcJb4JLb baJt4YPww1N3rbkK7HGpmsR68byeho5Ygw8VVHz+8BIyVRdEzg5/PwefotZXT/OIql5/ IoEloEY/9SM3ABPOQ0AxTwfAsxRRRR0cnyD3Vtq/Y2qgVQtLJaLx/cIHJXmfI849D9At yWQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=wa0u9WjMdfrDtoNQdvxz75RgHs0C3nrrN8jlNPdiCpI=; b=i8Oc0B5YlCS7QL4Leiebv7MiSdVk+1t7u/bP2lf08IqjSA3SpHvFIbJEWx+vprm9MT J+c1wZqwlBMQhKvUDf1xfJe+k1LkzyIX4XvsF9OBjkmDNdo/jnYcqjce4Ow6xwT0vGZs JGzYwv6WB2d7hOo0KqS7jMvGGwnbz7HzOrqUbHQ3Mx4f+qkLY+ftG0klLYGmj5ddSFOf xO32rhj++AzWmbHSJeKF4h0LMMtmAoHU3JP2LkQdyPRq8OMm8SRmrsP3uKjDAhcnzCrY 4Smt8nX0UFWyDJP3+1zejW5+cJLQQnHkhQ6WUYH6x5GIIPZkM0juP5mMPWSimca7Eo46 2Pag== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pmc8P+PSnPWuJCNqQ8Odf/hzVg9j/KXyzzTcqD3zQAide0+MFDP LTs0dhNBeY1pzrOGMLp+we4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf5MsLtvs30drzro+OqBoU6dDIsuhzqKSFwzpYW98qnc/j8HLsEn8QaOC+NBqJgDUMBMvh+fVg== X-Received: by 2002:a62:5a07:0:b0:56e:76e2:a375 with SMTP id o7-20020a625a07000000b0056e76e2a375mr4301297pfb.4.1668195317472; Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:35:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([14.96.13.220]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z27-20020aa7959b000000b00565cf8c52c8sm1988821pfj.174.2022.11.11.11.35.16 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 11 Nov 2022 11:35:17 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2022 01:05:09 +0530 From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi To: Xu Kuohai Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Fix offset calculation error in __copy_map_value and zero_map_value Message-ID: <20221111193509.dmklqyxyy3psvgfc@apollo> References: <20221111125620.754855-1-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20221111125620.754855-1-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 11, 2022 at 06:26:20PM IST, Xu Kuohai wrote: > From: Xu Kuohai > > Function __copy_map_value and zero_map_value miscalculated copy offset, > resulting in possible copy of unwanted data to user or kernel. > > Fix it. > > Fixes: cc48755808c6 ("bpf: Add zero_map_value to zero map value with special fields") > Fixes: 4d7d7f69f4b1 ("bpf: Adapt copy_map_value for multiple offset case") > Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai > --- Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi I also have a fix here for bpf-next, since this won't apply to it: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221111193224.876706-4-memxor@gmail.com I think it'd be best if this one gets applied to bpf and mine to bpf-next, and any conflicts are resolved when merging both trees (the conflict is trivial), but I'll leave it up to the maintainers to decide.