BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
	Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, sunhao.th@gmail.com, kernel-team@dataexmachina.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v3 3/3] bpf: minor cleanup around stack bounds
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2023 20:43:41 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f3475cc9e9ee50a7fdbbfff353f07067537cf1fd.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzbT-UBaigkGeimFOTUqadVMbUFJJ7g2gfR-Au3xxHd6Yg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2023-12-04 at 10:19 -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
[...]
> > @@ -6828,7 +6831,10 @@ static int check_stack_access_within_bounds(
> >                 return err;
> >         }
> > 
> > -       return grow_stack_state(env, state, round_up(-min_off, BPF_REG_SIZE));
> > +       /* Note that there is no stack access with offset zero, so the needed stack
> > +        * size is -min_off, not -min_off+1.
> > +        */
> > +       return grow_stack_state(env, state, -min_off /* size */);
> 
> hmm.. there is still a grow_stack_state() call in
> check_stack_write_fixed_off(), right? Which is not necessary because
> we do check_stack_access_within_bounds() before that one. Can you drop
> it as part of patch #2?

I'm not sure I understand what you mean. Patch #2 (v3) drops
grow_stack_state() from check_stack_write_fixed_off()
so all seems good?

  reply	other threads:[~2023-12-04 18:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-12-02 23:05 [PATCH bpf v3 0/3] bpf: fix accesses to uninit stack slots Andrei Matei
2023-12-02 23:05 ` [PATCH bpf v3 1/3] bpf: add some comments to stack representation Andrei Matei
2023-12-04 18:18   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-04 18:25   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-12-02 23:05 ` [PATCH bpf v3 2/3] bpf: fix accesses to uninit stack slots Andrei Matei
2023-12-02 23:09   ` Andrei Matei
2023-12-03 13:22     ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-12-04 18:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 23:05 ` [PATCH bpf v3 3/3] bpf: minor cleanup around stack bounds Andrei Matei
2023-12-04 18:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-04 18:43     ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-12-04 19:06       ` Andrii Nakryiko

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=f3475cc9e9ee50a7fdbbfff353f07067537cf1fd.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andreimatei1@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@dataexmachina.dev \
    --cc=sunhao.th@gmail.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