From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: fix BPF_F_CPU validation for sparse CPU IDs
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 22:44:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56ff2d90-5943-4e9b-afc8-18dcaef2f893@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260813101229.680523-3-sh_def@163.com>
Hi Hui,
On 2026/8/13 18:12, Hui Su wrote:
> BPF_F_CPU stores the target CPU ID in the upper 32 bits of the map
> operation flags. bpf_map_check_op_flags() currently compares that ID
> with num_possible_cpus(), which is the number of possible CPUs rather
> than a bound on CPU IDs.
>
> On an arm64 QEMU guest with a CPU device-tree hole, the possible CPU
TIL about the possible CPU hole.
> mask was 0,2-3. A userspace program using raw bpf() syscalls creates
> a BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY and performs update and lookup operations
> for each CPU by setting BPF_F_CPU and the CPU ID in the flags.
>
> With the old check, CPU 1 is incorrectly accepted while valid CPU 3 is
> rejected with -ERANGE. The CPU 1 update then reaches the per-CPU map
> access path and triggers:
>
> Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address ...
> pc : __pi_memcpy_generic+0x5c/0x22c
> lr : bpf_percpu_array_update+0x2dc/0x2e8
> Call trace:
> __pi_memcpy_generic
> bpf_map_update_value
> map_update_elem
> __sys_bpf
>
> Check the CPU ID against nr_cpu_ids and cpu_possible() instead. This
> rejects CPU IDs outside the valid range and CPUs absent from the
> possible mask, while allowing valid sparse CPU IDs.
>
> Fixes: 2b421662c788 ("bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags")
> Signed-off-by: Hui Su <sh_def@163.com>
> ---
> include/linux/bpf.h | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index 7719f6528445..282f7022d984 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -4202,7 +4202,8 @@ static inline int bpf_map_check_op_flags(struct bpf_map *map, u64 flags, u64 all
> return -EINVAL;
>
> cpu = flags >> 32;
> - if ((flags & BPF_F_CPU) && cpu >= num_possible_cpus())
> + if ((flags & BPF_F_CPU) &&
> + (cpu >= nr_cpu_ids || !cpu_possible(cpu)))
NIT: no need to put the cpu check on a new line, as 100 chars per line
are allowed.
Other than the NIT,
Acked-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
> return -ERANGE;
> }
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-13 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-13 10:12 [PATCH bpf] bpf: fix BPF_F_CPU validation for sparse CPU IDs Hui Su
2026-08-13 10:26 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-13 14:44 ` Leon Hwang [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=56ff2d90-5943-4e9b-afc8-18dcaef2f893@linux.dev \
--to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sh_def@163.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@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