BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 bpf-next 06/12] bpf: Factor callchain_store function from __bpf_get_stack
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2026 21:30:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260803213050.8EF301F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260803210149.296496-7-jolsa@kernel.org>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:

Pre-existing issues:
- [Critical] A Time-of-Check to Time-of-Use (TOCTOU) data race exists in `__bpf_get_stack` when used from a sleepable BPF program, allowing concurrent modification of `trace->nr` that leads to a massive Out-of-Bounds (OOB) memory read and write.
--

--- Patch [1]: [PATCHv3 bpf-next 06/12] bpf: Factor callchain_store function from __bpf_get_stack ---
commit 1569be7d337e247b4d7eb8620dff965cc57a3fc6
Author: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
bpf: Factor callchain_store function from __bpf_get_stack

This commit factors out the callchain storage logic into a new
callchain_store() function. It handles extracting both just-ip and buildid
data into a user-supplied buffer.

> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> index 463f94ba1cc47..e51e03c4b60ed 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/stackmap.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -680,6 +680,29 @@ const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_get_stackid_proto_pe = {
>  	.arg3_type	= ARG_ANYTHING,
>  };
>  
> +static u32 callchain_store(struct perf_callchain_entry *trace, void *buf,
> +			   u32 elem_size, u64 flags)
> +{
> +	bool user_build_id = flags & BPF_F_USER_BUILD_ID;
> +	u32 skip = flags & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK;
> +	u32 trace_nr, copy_len;
> +	u64 *ips;
> +
> +	trace_nr = trace->nr - skip;

[Severity: Critical]
This is a pre-existing issue, but could this unprotected re-read of
trace->nr lead to an integer underflow and out-of-bounds memory access?

If __bpf_get_stack() is called from a sleepable BPF program, preemption
is enabled. Between the bounds check in __bpf_get_stack() and this read,
the task could be preempted. If a preempting task running on the same CPU
executes a BPF program and reallocates the identical per-CPU buffer, it
might overwrite trace->nr with a smaller value.

When the sleepable task resumes, this re-read of trace->nr could result in
a value smaller than skip, causing trace_nr to underflow and resulting in
a massive copy_len during the memcpy() below.

> +	copy_len = trace_nr * elem_size;
> +
> +	ips = trace->ip + skip;
> +	if (user_build_id) {
> +		struct bpf_stack_build_id *id_offs = buf;
> +
> +		for (u32 i = 0; i < trace_nr; i++)
> +			id_offs[i].ip = ips[i];
> +	} else {
> +		memcpy(buf, ips, copy_len);
> +	}
> +	return trace_nr;
> +}
> +
>  static long __bpf_get_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *task,
[ ... ]
> @@ -737,21 +759,10 @@ static long __bpf_get_stack(struct pt_regs *regs, struct task_struct *task,
>  		goto err_fault;
>  	}
>  
> -	trace_nr = trace->nr - skip;
> +	trace_nr = callchain_store(trace, buf, elem_size, flags);

[Severity: Critical]
This isn't a bug introduced by this patch, but this is the preemption
window mentioned above.

The check if (unlikely(!trace) || trace->nr < skip) happens right before
this call. For sleepable BPF programs, preemption can occur between the
bounds check and the re-reading of trace->nr inside callchain_store().

Could we cache the validated trace->nr value (e.g., using READ_ONCE())
and pass it to callchain_store() to avoid this Time-of-Check to
Time-of-Use race?

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260803210149.296496-7-jolsa@kernel.org?part=1

  reply	other threads:[~2026-08-03 21:30 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-03 21:01 [PATCHv3 bpf-next 00/12] bpf: Disable preemption in stack map code Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 01/12] bpf: Factor stackid_init function from __bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 02/12] bpf: Factor stackid_fastpath " Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 22:21   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 03/12] bpf: Factor stackid_new_bucket " Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 04/12] bpf: Use stack id functions instead of __bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 05/12] bpf: Disable preemption in bpf_get_stackid Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 06/12] bpf: Factor callchain_store function from __bpf_get_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:30   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-08-04 12:02     ` Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 22:06   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 07/12] bpf: Factor callchain_finalize " Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 08/12] bpf: Remove trace_in argument " Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 22:21   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-04 20:05     ` Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 09/12] bpf: Clear buf on error in __bpf_get_task_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 10/12] bpf: Disable preemption in __bpf_get_stack Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 11/12] bpf: Avoid changing callchain in bpf_get_stack_pe Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 21:01 ` [PATCHv3 bpf-next 12/12] bpf: Avoid changing callchain in bpf_get_stackid_pe Jiri Olsa
2026-08-03 22:06   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-04 20:05     ` Jiri Olsa

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=20260803213050.8EF301F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jolsa@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