From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Igor Malovitsa" <igor.malovitsa@gmail.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: Load ringbuf consumer_pos under the spinlock
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 00:47:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-173535@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261016003318.529860-2-igor.malovitsa@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [High] bpf: ABI compat break for 32-bit userspace on 64-bit ringbuffer
--
commit 2d8c0038759a4aa9aef622680e46c8ac2c7b7e99
Author: Igor Malovitsa <igor.malovitsa@gmail.com>
bpf: Load ringbuf consumer_pos under the spinlock
__bpf_ringbuf_reserve() loads consumer_pos before taking the spinlock.
Nothing bounds how stale that value is when the lock is finally taken.
This patch moves the load of consumer_pos inside the spinlock to ensure
it is exact.
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c b/kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c
> index 3f1013d805446..6b86c4db51088 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/ringbuf.c
> @@ -473,11 +473,12 @@ static void *__bpf_ringbuf_reserve(struct bpf_ringbuf *rb, u64 size)
> if (len > ringbuf_total_data_sz(rb))
> return NULL;
>
> - cons_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos);
> -
> if (raw_res_spin_lock_irqsave(&rb->spinlock, flags))
> return NULL;
>
> + /* Under the lock, so at most one ring behind producer_pos. */
> + cons_pos = smp_load_acquire(&rb->consumer_pos);
[Severity: High]
Does this code handle 32-bit userspace running on a 64-bit kernel correctly?
Since consumer_pos and producer_pos are defined as unsigned long in
struct bpf_ringbuf, they are 64-bit on a 64-bit kernel but treated as
32-bit by 32-bit userspace applications.
On little-endian architectures, 32-bit userspace updates only the lower
32 bits. When the userspace counter wraps after 4GB, it writes 0.
Since the kernel's 64-bit producer_pos will exceed 4GB, new_prod_pos -
cons_pos evaluates to a value greater than 4GB.
Because this value is larger than the ringbuffer mask, does this cause the
kernel to incorrectly believe the ringbuffer is permanently full?
Can an unprivileged 32-bit process trigger this state after 4GB of traffic,
causing a permanent DoS on the map?
> +
> pend_pos = rb->pending_pos;
> prod_pos = rb->producer_pos;
> new_prod_pos = prod_pos + len;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261016003318.529860-1-igor.malovitsa@gmail.com?part=1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-16 0:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-16 0:33 [PATCH bpf 0/2] bpf: Fix ring buffer checks on 32-bit position wrap Igor Malovitsa
2026-10-16 0:33 ` [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: Load ringbuf consumer_pos under the spinlock Igor Malovitsa
2026-10-16 0:47 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-16 0:33 ` [PATCH bpf 2/2] bpf: Fix user ringbuf empty check on 32-bit position wrap Igor Malovitsa
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=sashiko-outbox-173535@kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=igor.malovitsa@gmail.com \
--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