From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Amery Hung" <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/18] bpf: Check fixed-size mem args of helpers and kfuncs the same way
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2026 08:17:20 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260801081721.132401F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260801074633.1595644-9-ameryhung@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
New issues:
- [High] Kfuncs taking uninitialized memory arguments via the `__uninit` annotation are falsely rejected when passed uninitialized stack slots.
Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] The verifier fails to check if the size argument for `KF_ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_SIZE` kfuncs is a scalar, allowing BPF programs to pass kernel pointers as size arguments, leading to an out-of-bounds access.
--
--- Patch [8]: [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/18] bpf: Check fixed-size mem args of helpers and kfuncs the same way ---
commit bcee13ba62b78a9328164e2486f3c31a7fddb8a0
Author: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
bpf: Check fixed-size mem args of helpers and kfuncs the same way
Fixed-size memory arguments went through two paths: helpers called
check_helper_mem_access() directly, while kfuncs and global subprogs
used check_mem_reg(). Route the helper MEM_FIXED_SIZE case through
check_mem_reg() too so all three share the same check.
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index f61771e2a8b27..9e0c7f0a15c15 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -12379,7 +12385,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_call_arg_me
> ref_tname, PTR_ERR(resolve_ret));
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - ret = check_mem_reg(env, reg, argno, type_size, meta);
> + ret = check_mem_reg(env, reg, argno, type_size, BPF_READ | BPF_WRITE, meta);
[Severity: High]
Does this change break BPF programs that pass uninitialized stack slots to
kfuncs using the __uninit annotation?
Because check_mem_reg() is now unconditionally called with
BPF_READ | BPF_WRITE here, it seems to mandate initialization for __uninit
kfunc arguments as well, which should only require BPF_WRITE.
> if (ret < 0)
> return ret;
> break;
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_SIZE:
> {
> struct bpf_reg_state *buff_reg = reg;
> const struct btf_param *buff_arg = &args[i];
> struct bpf_reg_state *size_reg = get_func_arg_reg(caller, regs, i + 1);
> const struct btf_param *size_arg = &args[i + 1];
> argno_t next_argno = argno_from_arg(i + 2);
>
> if (!bpf_register_is_null(buff_reg) || !is_kfunc_arg_nullable(meta->btf, buff_arg)) {
> ret = check_mem_size_reg(env, buff_reg, size_reg, argno, next_argno,
> BPF_READ | BPF_WRITE, true, meta);
> if (ret < 0) {
[ ... ]
> }
>
> /* Skip next '__sz' or '__szk' argument */
> i++;
> break;
[Severity: Critical]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but does the verifier fail to
enforce that the size argument is a scalar for KF_ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_SIZE?
The loop uses i++ to skip the next iteration, which completely bypasses the
btf_type_is_scalar validation for the size argument. check_mem_size_reg()
also assumes the register is a SCALAR_VALUE without verifying it.
If a BPF program passes a pointer register (like PTR_TO_STACK with a zero
offset) as the size argument, reg_umax evaluates to 0, which passes the
verifier's size checks. At runtime, the full kernel pointer address could be
used as the size, potentially allowing an out-of-bounds memory access.
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260801074633.1595644-1-ameryhung@gmail.com?part=8
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-01 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-01 7:46 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/18] Generate bpf_func_proto for kfunc Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/18] bpf: Drop process_timer_func wrappers Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/18] bpf: Unify const map ptr argument checking for helpers and kfuncs Amery Hung
2026-08-01 8:03 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/18] bpf: Split kfunc map argument into __const_map and __map Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/18] bpf: Pass kfunc meta to mem and mem_size check Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/18] bpf: Resolve map lookup result type at lookup time Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/18] bpf: Check helper and kfunc mem+size arguments identically Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/18] selftests/bpf: Test map lookup result refinement Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/18] bpf: Check fixed-size mem args of helpers and kfuncs the same way Amery Hung
2026-08-01 8:17 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/18] bpf: Rename ARG_CONST_SIZE{,_OR_ZERO} to ARG_MEM_SIZE{,_OR_ZERO} Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/18] bpf: Fold __szk const size handling into the scalar arg path Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/18] selftests/bpf: Test __szk precision with a NULL nullable buffer Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/18] bpf: Classify kfunc mem_size args from BTF without register state Amery Hung
2026-08-01 8:09 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/18] bpf: Handle NULL kfunc pointer args without a KF_ARG_PTR_TO_NULL type Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 14/18] bpf: Distinguish fixed- and variable-size kfunc mem args with MEM_FIXED_SIZE Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 15/18] bpf: Classify kfunc pointer arguments from BTF, resolve type against the register Amery Hung
2026-08-01 8:22 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 16/18] bpf: Tag nullable kfunc pointer args with PTR_MAYBE_NULL Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 17/18] bpf: Classify scalar kfunc arguments from BTF Amery Hung
2026-08-01 7:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 18/18] bpf: Generate kfunc argument prototype at add-call time Amery Hung
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=20260801081721.132401F00AC4@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox