bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Luis Gerhorst <luis.gerhorst@fau.de>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Andrii Nakryiko	 <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu	 <song@kernel.org>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	KP Singh	 <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
	Hao Luo	 <haoluo@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, 	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2] bpf: Remove redundant free_verifier_state()/pop_stack()
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2025 14:17:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <a4fbe41d6f4c25c3d1edd42905eb556541857327.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250613090157.568349-2-luis.gerhorst@fau.de>

On Fri, 2025-06-13 at 11:01 +0200, Luis Gerhorst wrote:
> This patch removes duplicated code.
> 
> Eduard points out [1]:
> 
>     Same cleanup cycles are done in push_stack() and push_async_cb(),
>     both functions are only reachable from do_check_common() via
>     do_check() -> do_check_insn().
> 
>     Hence, I think that cur state should not be freed in push_*()
>     functions and pop_stack() loop there is not needed.
> 
> This would also fix the 'symptom' for [2], but the issue also has a
> simpler fix which was sent separately. This fix also makes sure the
> push_*() callers always return an error for which
> error_recoverable_with_nospec(err) is false. This is required because
> otherwise we try to recover and access the stale `state`.
> 
> Moving free_verifier_state() and pop_stack(..., pop_log=false) to happen
> after the bpf_vlog_reset() call in do_check_common() is fine because the
> pop_stack() call that is moved does not call bpf_vlog_reset() with the
> pop_log=false parameter.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/b6931bd0dd72327c55287862f821ca6c4c3eb69a.camel@gmail.com/
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/68497853.050a0220.33aa0e.036a.GAE@google.com/
> 
> Reported-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/b6931bd0dd72327c55287862f821ca6c4c3eb69a.camel@gmail.com/
> Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst <luis.gerhorst@fau.de>
> ---

Tried v2, all looks good.

[...]

> @@ -22934,6 +22922,11 @@ static void free_states(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  	struct bpf_scc_info *info;
>  	int i, j;
>  
> +	WARN_ON_ONCE(!env->cur_state);

Tbh I woudn't do this a warning, just an 'if (env->cur_state) ...',
but that's immaterial. Given current way do_check_common() is written
env->cur_state != NULL at this point, so the patch is safe to land.

> +	free_verifier_state(env->cur_state, true);
> +	env->cur_state = NULL;
> +	while (!pop_stack(env, NULL, NULL, false));
> +
>  	list_for_each_safe(pos, tmp, &env->free_list) {
>  		sl = container_of(pos, struct bpf_verifier_state_list, node);
>  		free_verifier_state(&sl->state, false);

  reply	other threads:[~2025-06-13 21:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-06-11 12:36 [syzbot] [bpf?] KASAN: slab-use-after-free Read in do_check syzbot
2025-06-11 13:02 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-11 14:03   ` Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-11 17:20     ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-11 21:07       ` [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix state use-after-free on push_stack() err Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-11 22:23         ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-11 23:10         ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2025-06-11 21:14       ` [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Remove redundant free_verifier_state()/pop_stack() Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-11 22:36         ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-13  9:01           ` [PATCH bpf-next v2] " Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-13 21:17             ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2025-06-13 22:06               ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-06-13  9:07           ` [PATCH bpf-next] " Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-11 21:32       ` [syzbot] [bpf?] KASAN: slab-use-after-free Read in do_check Luis Gerhorst
2025-06-11 21:43         ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-11 21:40 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-06-11 23:00   ` syzbot

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=a4fbe41d6f4c25c3d1edd42905eb556541857327.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=luis.gerhorst@fau.de \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).