From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Zac Ecob <zacecob@protonmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Fix a sdiv overflow issue
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2024 21:40:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240911044017.2261738-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
Zac Ecob reported a problem where a bpf program may cause kernel crash due
to the following error:
Oops: divide error: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP KASAN PTI
The failure is due to the below signed divide:
LLONG_MIN/-1 where LLONG_MIN equals to -9,223,372,036,854,775,808.
LLONG_MIN/-1 is supposed to give a positive number 9,223,372,036,854,775,808,
but it is impossible since for 64-bit system, the maximum positive
number is 9,223,372,036,854,775,807. On x86_64, LLONG_MIN/-1 will
cause a kernel exception. On arm64, the result for LLONG_MIN/-1 is
LLONG_MIN.
So for 64-bit signed divide (sdiv), some additional insns are patched
to check LLONG_MIN/-1 pattern. If such a pattern does exist, the result
will be LLONG_MIN. Otherwise, it follows normal sdiv operation.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/tPJLTEh7S_DxFEqAI2Ji5MBSoZVg7_G-Py2iaZpAaWtM961fFTWtsnlzwvTbzBzaUzwQAoNATXKUlt0LZOFgnDcIyKCswAnAGdUF3LBrhGQ=@protonmail.com/
Reported-by: Zac Ecob <zacecob@protonmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index f35b80c16cda..d77f1a05a065 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -20506,6 +20506,7 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
insn->code == (BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X)) {
bool is64 = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64;
bool isdiv = BPF_OP(insn->code) == BPF_DIV;
+ bool is_sdiv64 = is64 && isdiv && insn->off == 1;
struct bpf_insn *patchlet;
struct bpf_insn chk_and_div[] = {
/* [R,W]x div 0 -> 0 */
@@ -20525,10 +20526,32 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_MOV32_REG(insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
};
+ struct bpf_insn chk_and_sdiv64[] = {
+ /* Rx sdiv 0 -> 0 */
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
+ 0, 2, 0),
+ BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_XOR, insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 8),
+ /* LLONG_MIN sdiv -1 -> LLONG_MIN */
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
+ 0, 6, -1),
+ BPF_LD_IMM64(insn->src_reg, LLONG_MIN),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_X, insn->dst_reg,
+ insn->src_reg, 2, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(insn->src_reg, -1),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(insn->src_reg, -1),
+ *insn,
+ };
- patchlet = isdiv ? chk_and_div : chk_and_mod;
- cnt = isdiv ? ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_div) :
- ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_mod) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
+ if (is_sdiv64) {
+ patchlet = chk_and_sdiv64;
+ cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_sdiv64);
+ } else {
+ patchlet = isdiv ? chk_and_div : chk_and_mod;
+ cnt = isdiv ? ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_div) :
+ ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_mod) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
+ }
new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patchlet, cnt);
if (!new_prog)
--
2.43.5
next reply other threads:[~2024-09-11 4:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-09-11 4:40 Yonghong Song [this message]
2024-09-11 4:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a couple of tests for potential sdiv overflow Yonghong Song
2024-09-11 14:18 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Fix a sdiv overflow issue Daniel Borkmann
2024-09-11 15:14 ` Yonghong Song
2024-09-11 15:52 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-09-11 17:01 ` Yonghong Song
2024-09-11 17:17 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-09-11 17:32 ` Yonghong Song
2024-09-12 6:54 ` kernel test robot
2024-09-12 16:43 ` Yonghong Song
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=20240911044017.2261738-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=zacecob@protonmail.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