leandrof/linux
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
ad5b177bd7
linux/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c

7174 lines
215 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
/*
* Testsuite for eBPF verifier
*
* Copyright (c) 2014 PLUMgrid, http://plumgrid.com
*
* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or
* modify it under the terms of version 2 of the GNU General Public
* License as published by the Free Software Foundation.
*/
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#include <endian.h>
selftests/bpf: fix broken build Recent merge of 'linux-kselftest-4.11-rc1' tree broke bpf test build. None of the tests were building and test_verifier.c had tons of compiler errors. Fix it and add #ifdef CAP_IS_SUPPORTED to support old versions of libcap. Tested on centos 6.8 and 7 Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-11 06:05:55 +00:00
#include <asm/types.h>
#include <linux/types.h>
bpf: Remove bpf_sys.h from selftests Add require dependency headers. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:44 +00:00
#include <stdint.h>
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
#include <stdio.h>
bpf: Remove bpf_sys.h from selftests Add require dependency headers. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:44 +00:00
#include <stdlib.h>
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
#include <unistd.h>
#include <errno.h>
#include <string.h>
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
#include <stddef.h>
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
#include <stdbool.h>
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
#include <sched.h>
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
#include <sys/capability.h>
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
#include <sys/resource.h>
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
#include <linux/unistd.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <linux/bpf_perf_event.h>
#include <linux/bpf.h>
bpf: Use bpf_load_program() from the library Replace bpf_prog_load() with bpf_load_program() calls. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:38 +00:00
#include <bpf/bpf.h>
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
#ifdef HAVE_GENHDR
# include "autoconf.h"
#else
# if defined(__i386) || defined(__x86_64) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__aarch64__)
# define CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS 1
# endif
#endif
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
#include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
#ifndef ARRAY_SIZE
# define ARRAY_SIZE(x) (sizeof(x) / sizeof((x)[0]))
#endif
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
#define MAX_INSNS 512
#define MAX_FIXUPS 8
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
#define MAX_NR_MAPS 4
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
#define F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (1 << 0)
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
#define F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT (1 << 1)
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
struct bpf_test {
const char *descr;
struct bpf_insn insns[MAX_INSNS];
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int fixup_map1[MAX_FIXUPS];
int fixup_map2[MAX_FIXUPS];
int fixup_prog[MAX_FIXUPS];
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
int fixup_map_in_map[MAX_FIXUPS];
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
const char *errstr;
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
const char *errstr_unpriv;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
enum {
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
UNDEF,
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
ACCEPT,
REJECT
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
} result, result_unpriv;
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
enum bpf_prog_type prog_type;
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
uint8_t flags;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
};
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
/* Note we want this to be 64 bit aligned so that the end of our array is
* actually the end of the structure.
*/
#define MAX_ENTRIES 11
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
struct test_val {
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
unsigned int index;
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
int foo[MAX_ENTRIES];
};
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
{
"add+sub+mul",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MUL, BPF_REG_1, 3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unreachable",
.insns = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "unreachable",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"unreachable2",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "unreachable",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"out of range jump",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "jump out of range",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"out of range jump2",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "jump out of range",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test1 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid BPF_LD_IMM insn",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test2 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid BPF_LD_IMM insn",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test3 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test4 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test5 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
{
"test6 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"test7 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"test8 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 1, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "uses reserved fields",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test9 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 1, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test10 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test11 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test12 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "not pointing to valid bpf_map",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"test13 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_ld_imm64 insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
"no bpf_exit",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
},
.errstr = "jump out of range",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"loop (back-edge)",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "back-edge",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"loop2 (back-edge)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "back-edge",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"conditional loop",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, -3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "back-edge",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"read uninitialized register",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R2 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"read invalid register",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R15 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"program doesn't init R0 before exit",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R0 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: fix bug in eBPF verifier while comparing for verifier state equivalency the comparison was missing a check for uninitialized register. Make sure it does so and add a testcase. Fixes: f1bca824dabb ("bpf: add search pruning optimization to verifier") Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-10-20 21:54:57 +00:00
{
"program doesn't init R0 before exit in all branches",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R0 !read_ok",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
bpf: fix bug in eBPF verifier while comparing for verifier state equivalency the comparison was missing a check for uninitialized register. Make sure it does so and add a testcase. Fixes: f1bca824dabb ("bpf: add search pruning optimization to verifier") Cc: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-10-20 21:54:57 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
"stack out of bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, 8, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid call insn1",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL | BPF_X, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "BPF_CALL uses reserved",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid call insn2",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 1, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "BPF_CALL uses reserved",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid function call",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, 1234567),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: fix multiple issues in selftest suite and samples 1) The test_lru_map and test_lru_dist fails building on my machine since the sys/resource.h header is not included. 2) test_verifier fails in one test case where we try to call an invalid function, since the verifier log output changed wrt printing function names. 3) Current selftest suite code relies on sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF) for retrieving the number of possible CPUs. This is broken at least in our scenario and really just doesn't work. glibc tries a number of things for retrieving _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF. First it tries equivalent of /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu[0-9]* | wc -l, if that fails, depending on the config, it either tries to count CPUs in /proc/cpuinfo, or returns the _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN value instead. If /proc/cpuinfo has some issue, it returns just 1 worst case. This oddity is nothing new [1], but semantics/behaviour seems to be settled. _SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN will parse /sys/devices/system/cpu/online, if that fails it looks into /proc/stat for cpuX entries, and if also that fails for some reason, /proc/cpuinfo is consulted (and returning 1 if unlikely all breaks down). While that might match num_possible_cpus() from the kernel in some cases, it's really not guaranteed with CPU hotplugging, and can result in a buffer overflow since the array in user space could have too few number of slots, and on perpcu map lookup, the kernel will write beyond that memory of the value buffer. William Tu reported such mismatches: [...] The fact that sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF) != num_possible_cpu() happens when CPU hotadd is enabled. For example, in Fusion when setting vcpu.hotadd = "TRUE" or in KVM, setting ./qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 2, maxcpus=4 ... the num_possible_cpu() will be 4 and sysconf() will be 2 [2]. [...] Documentation/cputopology.txt says /sys/devices/system/cpu/possible outputs cpu_possible_mask. That is the same as in num_possible_cpus(), so first step would be to fix the _SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF calls with our own implementation. Later, we could add support to bpf(2) for passing a mask via CPU_SET(3), for example, to just select a subset of CPUs. BPF samples code needs this fix as well (at least so that people stop copying this). Thus, define bpf_num_possible_cpus() once in selftests and import it from there for the sample code to avoid duplicating it. The remaining sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_CONF) in samples are unrelated. After all three issues are fixed, the test suite runs fine again: # make run_tests | grep self selftests: test_verifier [PASS] selftests: test_maps [PASS] selftests: test_lru_map [PASS] selftests: test_kmod.sh [PASS] [1] https://www.sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2011-06/msg00079.html [2] https://www.mail-archive.com/netdev@vger.kernel.org/msg121183.html Fixes: 3059303f59cf ("samples/bpf: update tracex[23] examples to use per-cpu maps") Fixes: 86af8b4191d2 ("Add sample for adding simple drop program to link") Fixes: df570f577231 ("samples/bpf: unit test for BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY") Fixes: e15596717948 ("samples/bpf: unit test for BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH") Fixes: ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id") Fixes: 5db58faf989f ("bpf: Add tests for the LRU bpf_htab") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-11-26 00:28:09 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid func unknown#1234567",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"uninitialized stack1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 2 },
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid indirect read from stack",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"uninitialized stack2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid read from stack",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
{
"invalid fp arithmetic",
/* If this gets ever changed, make sure JITs can deal with it. */
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 subtraction from stack pointer",
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 invalid mem access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"non-invalid fp arithmetic",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
{
"invalid argument register",
.insns = {
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_cgroup_classid),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_cgroup_classid),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R1 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"non-invalid argument register",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_cgroup_classid),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_cgroup_classid),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
"check valid spill/fill",
.insns = {
/* spill R1(ctx) into stack */
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
/* fill it back into R2 */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -8),
/* should be able to access R0 = *(R2 + 8) */
ebpf: remove kernel test stubs Now that we have BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER up and running, we can remove the test stubs which were added to get the verifier suite up. We can just let the test cases probe under socket filter type instead. In the fill/spill test case, we cannot (yet) access fields from the context (skb), but we may adapt that test case in future. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-01 11:31:41 +00:00
/* BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 8), */
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
},
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
{
"check valid spill/fill, skb mark",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = ACCEPT,
},
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
"check corrupted spill/fill",
.insns = {
/* spill R1(ctx) into stack */
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
/* mess up with R1 pointer on stack */
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_10, -7, 0x23),
/* fill back into R0 should fail */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "attempt to corrupt spilled",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.errstr = "corrupted spill",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid src register in STX",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_10, -1, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R15 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid dst register in STX",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, 14, BPF_REG_10, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R14 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid dst register in ST",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, 14, -1, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R14 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid src register in LDX",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 12, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R12 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid dst register in LDX",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, 11, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R11 is invalid",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"junk insn",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid BPF_LD_IMM",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"junk insn2",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(1, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "BPF_LDX uses reserved fields",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"junk insn3",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(-1, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid BPF_ALU opcode f0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"junk insn4",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(-1, -1, -1, -1, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid BPF_ALU opcode f0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"junk insn5",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(0x7f, -1, -1, -1, -1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "BPF_ALU uses reserved fields",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"misaligned read from stack",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned stack access",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map_fd for function call",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_delete_elem),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "fd 0 is not pointing to valid bpf_map",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"don't check return value before access",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'map_value_or_null'",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"access memory with incorrect alignment",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 4, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned value access",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
},
{
"sometimes access memory with incorrect alignment",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
},
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
{
"jump test 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -8, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 1, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -16, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 2, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -8, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 3, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -16, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 4, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -8, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 5, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -32, 5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"jump test 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -8, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 14),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -16, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 11),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 2, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -32, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 3, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -40, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 5),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 4, 2),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -48, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 5, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -56, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"jump test 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -8, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 19),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 1, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -16, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -16),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 15),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 2, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -32, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -32),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 11),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 3, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -40, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -40),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 7),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 4, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -48, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -48),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 5, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, -56, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -56),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_delete_elem),
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 24 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"jump test 4",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add tests to verifier testsuite add 4 extra tests to cover jump verification better Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-30 01:50:02 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
},
samples: bpf: add a verifier test and summary line - add a test specifically targeting verifier state pruning. It checks state propagation between registers, storing that state into stack and state pruning algorithm recognizing equivalent stack and register states. - add summary line to spot failures easier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-10-28 22:11:42 +00:00
{
"jump test 5",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
samples: bpf: add a verifier test and summary line - add a test specifically targeting verifier state pruning. It checks state propagation between registers, storing that state into stack and state pruning algorithm recognizing equivalent stack and register states. - add summary line to spot failures easier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-10-28 22:11:42 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
},
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
{
"access skb fields ok",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, len)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, pkt_type)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, queue_mapping)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
bpf: allow BPF programs access 'protocol' and 'vlan_tci' fields as a follow on to patch 70006af95515 ("bpf: allow eBPF access skb fields") this patch allows 'protocol' and 'vlan_tci' fields to be accessible from extended BPF programs. The usage of 'protocol', 'vlan_present' and 'vlan_tci' fields is the same as corresponding SKF_AD_PROTOCOL, SKF_AD_VLAN_TAG_PRESENT and SKF_AD_VLAN_TAG accesses in classic BPF. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-17 01:06:02 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, protocol)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, vlan_present)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, vlan_tci)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
bpf: add napi_id read access to __sk_buff Add napi_id access to __sk_buff for socket filter program types, tc program types and other bpf_convert_ctx_access() users. Having access to skb->napi_id is useful for per RX queue listener siloing, f.e. in combination with SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_EBPF and when busy polling is used, meaning SO_REUSEPORT enabled listeners can then select the corresponding socket at SYN time already [1]. The skb is marked via skb_mark_napi_id() early in the receive path (e.g., napi_gro_receive()). Currently, sockets can only use SO_INCOMING_NAPI_ID from 6d4339028b35 ("net: Introduce SO_INCOMING_NAPI_ID") as a socket option to look up the NAPI ID associated with the queue for steering, which requires a prior sk_mark_napi_id() after the socket was looked up. Semantics for the __sk_buff napi_id access are similar, meaning if skb->napi_id is < MIN_NAPI_ID (e.g. outgoing packets using sender_cpu), then an invalid napi_id of 0 is returned to the program, otherwise a valid non-zero napi_id. [1] http://netdevconf.org/2.1/slides/apr6/dumazet-BUSY-POLLING-Netdev-2.1.pdf Suggested-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-19 21:01:17 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, napi_id)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"access skb fields bad1",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"access skb fields bad2",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, pkt_type)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
.errstr = "different pointers",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"access skb fields bad3",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, pkt_type)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -12),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 6 },
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
.errstr = "different pointers",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
samples: bpf: add skb->field examples and tests - modify sockex1 example to count number of bytes in outgoing packets - modify sockex2 example to count number of bytes and packets per flow - add 4 stress tests that exercise 'skb->field' code path of verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-03-13 18:57:43 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: fix two bugs in verification logic when accessing 'ctx' pointer 1. first bug is a silly mistake. It broke tracing examples and prevented simple bpf programs from loading. In the following code: if (insn->imm == 0 && BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_W) { } else if (...) { // this part should have been executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } Obviously it's not doing that. So simple instructions like: r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) will be rejected. Note the comments in the code around these branches were and still valid and indicate the true intent. Replace it with: if (BPF_SIZE(insn->code) != BPF_W) continue; if (insn->imm == 0) { } else if (...) { // now this code will be executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } 2. second bug is more subtle. If malicious code is using the same dest register as source register, the checks designed to prevent the same instruction to be used with different pointer types will fail to trigger, since we were assigning src_reg_type when it was already overwritten by check_mem_access(). The fix is trivial. Just move line: src_reg_type = regs[insn->src_reg].type; before check_mem_access(). Add new 'access skb fields bad4' test to check this case. Fixes: 9bac3d6d548e ("bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-04-15 23:19:33 +00:00
{
"access skb fields bad4",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, len)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: fix two bugs in verification logic when accessing 'ctx' pointer 1. first bug is a silly mistake. It broke tracing examples and prevented simple bpf programs from loading. In the following code: if (insn->imm == 0 && BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_W) { } else if (...) { // this part should have been executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } Obviously it's not doing that. So simple instructions like: r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) will be rejected. Note the comments in the code around these branches were and still valid and indicate the true intent. Replace it with: if (BPF_SIZE(insn->code) != BPF_W) continue; if (insn->imm == 0) { } else if (...) { // now this code will be executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } 2. second bug is more subtle. If malicious code is using the same dest register as source register, the checks designed to prevent the same instruction to be used with different pointer types will fail to trigger, since we were assigning src_reg_type when it was already overwritten by check_mem_access(). The fix is trivial. Just move line: src_reg_type = regs[insn->src_reg].type; before check_mem_access(). Add new 'access skb fields bad4' test to check this case. Fixes: 9bac3d6d548e ("bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-04-15 23:19:33 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -13),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 7 },
bpf: fix two bugs in verification logic when accessing 'ctx' pointer 1. first bug is a silly mistake. It broke tracing examples and prevented simple bpf programs from loading. In the following code: if (insn->imm == 0 && BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_W) { } else if (...) { // this part should have been executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } Obviously it's not doing that. So simple instructions like: r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) will be rejected. Note the comments in the code around these branches were and still valid and indicate the true intent. Replace it with: if (BPF_SIZE(insn->code) != BPF_W) continue; if (insn->imm == 0) { } else if (...) { // now this code will be executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } 2. second bug is more subtle. If malicious code is using the same dest register as source register, the checks designed to prevent the same instruction to be used with different pointer types will fail to trigger, since we were assigning src_reg_type when it was already overwritten by check_mem_access(). The fix is trivial. Just move line: src_reg_type = regs[insn->src_reg].type; before check_mem_access(). Add new 'access skb fields bad4' test to check this case. Fixes: 9bac3d6d548e ("bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-04-15 23:19:33 +00:00
.errstr = "different pointers",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
bpf: fix two bugs in verification logic when accessing 'ctx' pointer 1. first bug is a silly mistake. It broke tracing examples and prevented simple bpf programs from loading. In the following code: if (insn->imm == 0 && BPF_SIZE(insn->code) == BPF_W) { } else if (...) { // this part should have been executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } Obviously it's not doing that. So simple instructions like: r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8) will be rejected. Note the comments in the code around these branches were and still valid and indicate the true intent. Replace it with: if (BPF_SIZE(insn->code) != BPF_W) continue; if (insn->imm == 0) { } else if (...) { // now this code will be executed when // insn->code == BPF_W and insn->imm != 0 } 2. second bug is more subtle. If malicious code is using the same dest register as source register, the checks designed to prevent the same instruction to be used with different pointer types will fail to trigger, since we were assigning src_reg_type when it was already overwritten by check_mem_access(). The fix is trivial. Just move line: src_reg_type = regs[insn->src_reg].type; before check_mem_access(). Add new 'access skb fields bad4' test to check this case. Fixes: 9bac3d6d548e ("bpf: allow extended BPF programs access skb fields") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-04-15 23:19:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: selftests: add tests for new __sk_buff members This adds tests to access new __sk_buff members from sk skb program type. Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-16 05:33:56 +00:00
{
"invalid access __sk_buff family",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, family)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff remote_ip4",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip4)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff local_ip4",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip4)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff remote_ip6",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip6)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff local_ip6",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip6)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff remote_port",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_port)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid access __sk_buff remote_port",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_port)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff family",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, family)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff remote_ip4",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip4)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff local_ip4",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip4)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff remote_ip6",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip6[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip6[1])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip6[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_ip6[3])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff local_ip6",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip6[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip6[1])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip6[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_ip6[3])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff remote_port",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, remote_port)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"valid access __sk_buff remote_port",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, local_port)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
bpf: more SK_SKB selftests Tests packet read/writes and additional skb fields. Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-28 14:11:24 +00:00
{
"invalid access of tc_classid for SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
},
{
"check skb->mark is writeable by SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"check skb->tc_index is writeable by SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"check skb->priority is writeable by SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, priority)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"direct packet read for SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"direct packet write for SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
{
"overlapping checks for direct packet access SK_SKB",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
},
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
{
"check skb->mark is not writeable by sockets",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 leaks addr",
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"check skb->tc_index is not writeable by sockets",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 leaks addr",
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
"check cb access: byte",
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
.insns = {
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 3),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 3),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 3),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 3),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"__sk_buff->hash, offset 0, byte store not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"__sk_buff->tc_index, offset 3, byte store not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index) + 3),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
{
"check skb->hash byte load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 3),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"check skb->hash byte load not permitted 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"check skb->hash byte load not permitted 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"check skb->hash byte load not permitted 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 3),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
{
"check cb access: byte, wrong type",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK,
},
{
"check cb access: half",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3]) + 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"check cb access: half, unaligned",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"check __sk_buff->hash, offset 0, half store not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"check __sk_buff->tc_index, offset 2, half store not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index) + 2),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
{
"check skb->hash half load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 2),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"check skb->hash half load not permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 2),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
{
"check cb access: half, wrong type",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK,
},
{
"check cb access: word",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"check cb access: word, unaligned 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: word, unaligned 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: word, unaligned 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: word, unaligned 4",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4]) + 3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: double",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"check cb access: double, unaligned 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[1])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: double, unaligned 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned context access",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
},
{
"check cb access: double, oob 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"check cb access: double, oob 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"check __sk_buff->ifindex dw store not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, ifindex)),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
"check __sk_buff->ifindex dw load not permitted",
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
bpf: permits narrower load from bpf program context fields Currently, verifier will reject a program if it contains an narrower load from the bpf context structure. For example, __u8 h = __sk_buff->hash, or __u16 p = __sk_buff->protocol __u32 sample_period = bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period which are narrower loads of 4-byte or 8-byte field. This patch solves the issue by: . Introduce a new parameter ctx_field_size to carry the field size of narrower load from prog type specific *__is_valid_access validator back to verifier. . The non-zero ctx_field_size for a memory access indicates (1). underlying prog type specific convert_ctx_accesses supporting non-whole-field access (2). the current insn is a narrower or whole field access. . In verifier, for such loads where load memory size is less than ctx_field_size, verifier transforms it to a full field load followed by proper masking. . Currently, __sk_buff and bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period are supporting narrowing loads. . Narrower stores are still not allowed as typical ctx stores are just normal stores. Because of this change, some tests in verifier will fail and these tests are removed. As a bonus, rename some out of bound __sk_buff->cb access to proper field name and remove two redundant "skb cb oob" tests. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:13 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, ifindex)),
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"check cb access: double, wrong type",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
bpf: allow b/h/w/dw access for bpf's cb in ctx When structs are used to store temporary state in cb[] buffer that is used with programs and among tail calls, then the generated code will not always access the buffer in bpf_w chunks. We can ease programming of it and let this act more natural by allowing for aligned b/h/w/dw sized access for cb[] ctx member. Various test cases are attached as well for the selftest suite. Potentially, this can also be reused for other program types to pass data around. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-12 10:51:33 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SOCK,
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
},
{
"check out of range skb->cb access",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0]) + 256),
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "",
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_ACT,
},
{
"write skb fields from socket prog",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[4])),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index)),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[2])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 leaks addr",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
},
{
"write skb fields from tc_cls_act prog",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_index)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[3])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: allow programs to write to certain skb fields allow programs read/write skb->mark, tc_index fields and ((struct qdisc_skb_cb *)cb)->data. mark and tc_index are generically useful in TC. cb[0]-cb[4] are primarily used to pass arguments from one program to another called via bpf_tail_call() which can be seen in sockex3_kern.c example. All fields of 'struct __sk_buff' are readable to socket and tc_cls_act progs. mark, tc_index are writeable from tc_cls_act only. cb[0]-cb[4] are writeable by both sockets and tc_cls_act. Add verifier tests and improve sample code. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-06-04 17:11:54 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
ebpf: Allow dereferences of PTR_TO_STACK registers mov %rsp, %r1 ; r1 = rsp add $-8, %r1 ; r1 = rsp - 8 store_q $123, -8(%rsp) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- valid store_q $123, (%r1) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- previously invalid mov $0, %r0 exit ; Always need to exit And we'd get the following error: 0: (bf) r1 = r10 1: (07) r1 += -8 2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 999 3: (7a) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = 999 R1 invalid mem access 'fp' Unable to load program We already know that a register is a stack address and the appropriate offset, so we should be able to validate those references as well. Signed-off-by: Alex Gartrell <agartrell@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-07-23 21:24:40 +00:00
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -10),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, 2, 0xfaceb00c),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - bad alignment on off",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, 2, 0xfaceb00c),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned stack access off (0x0; 0x0)+-8+2 size 8",
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
ebpf: Allow dereferences of PTR_TO_STACK registers mov %rsp, %r1 ; r1 = rsp add $-8, %r1 ; r1 = rsp - 8 store_q $123, -8(%rsp) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- valid store_q $123, (%r1) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- previously invalid mov $0, %r0 exit ; Always need to exit And we'd get the following error: 0: (bf) r1 = r10 1: (07) r1 += -8 2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 999 3: (7a) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = 999 R1 invalid mem access 'fp' Unable to load program We already know that a register is a stack address and the appropriate offset, so we should be able to validate those references as well. Signed-off-by: Alex Gartrell <agartrell@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-07-23 21:24:40 +00:00
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - bad alignment on reg",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -10),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, 8, 0xfaceb00c),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned stack access off (0x0; 0x0)+-10+8 size 8",
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
ebpf: Allow dereferences of PTR_TO_STACK registers mov %rsp, %r1 ; r1 = rsp add $-8, %r1 ; r1 = rsp - 8 store_q $123, -8(%rsp) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- valid store_q $123, (%r1) ; *(u64*)r1 = 123 <- previously invalid mov $0, %r0 exit ; Always need to exit And we'd get the following error: 0: (bf) r1 = r10 1: (07) r1 += -8 2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 999 3: (7a) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = 999 R1 invalid mem access 'fp' Unable to load program We already know that a register is a stack address and the appropriate offset, so we should be able to validate those references as well. Signed-off-by: Alex Gartrell <agartrell@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-07-23 21:24:40 +00:00
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - out of bounds low",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -80000),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, 8, 0xfaceb00c),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack off=-79992 size=8",
},
{
"PTR_TO_STACK store/load - out of bounds high",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, 8, 0xfaceb00c),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack off=0 size=8",
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
{
"unpriv: return pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
},
{
"unpriv: add const to pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: add pointer to pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer += pointer",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
},
{
"unpriv: neg pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_NEG, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer arithmetic",
},
{
"unpriv: cmp pointer with const",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
},
{
"unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr_unpriv = "R10 pointer comparison",
},
{
"unpriv: check that printk is disallowed",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_trace_printk),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf, test_verifier: fix a test case error result on unprivileged Running ./test_verifier as unprivileged lets 1 out of 98 tests fail: [...] #71 unpriv: check that printk is disallowed FAIL Unexpected error message! 0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 1: (bf) r1 = r10 2: (07) r1 += -8 3: (b7) r2 = 8 4: (bf) r3 = r1 5: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6 unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6 [...] The test case is correct, just that the error outcome changed with ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id"). Same as with e00c7b216f34 ("bpf: fix multiple issues in selftest suite and samples") issue 2), so just fix up the function name. Fixes: ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-12-15 00:39:10 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: pass pointer to helper function",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_update_elem),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R4 leaks addr",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid indirect read from stack off -8+0 size 8",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "attempt to corrupt spilled",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_10, -1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "attempt to corrupt spilled",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid size",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"unpriv: write pointer into ctx",
.insns = {
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 leaks addr",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of ctx",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of ctx 2",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_hash_recalc),
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of ctx 3",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_hash_recalc),
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 type=fp expected=ctx",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of ctx 4",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10,
BPF_REG_0, -8, 0),
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_get_hash_recalc),
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 type=inv expected=ctx",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of different pointers stx",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 42),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "same insn cannot be used with different pointers",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"unpriv: spill/fill of different pointers ldx",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2,
-(__s32)offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data,
sample_period) - 8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data,
sample_period)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "same insn cannot be used with different pointers",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
{
"unpriv: write pointer into map elem value",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: partial copy of pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV32_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "R10 partial copy",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_2, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_tail_call),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_prog = { 1 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R3 leaks addr into helper",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 1 },
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"unpriv: write into frame pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "frame pointer is read only",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: add various tests around spill/fill of regs Add several spill/fill tests. Besides others, one that performs xadd on the spilled register, one ldx/stx test where different types are spilled from two branches and read out from common path. Verfier does handle all correctly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:35 +00:00
{
"unpriv: spill/fill frame pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "frame pointer is read only",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
{
"unpriv: cmp of frame pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_10, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "R10 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
{
"unpriv: adding of fp",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
},
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
{
"unpriv: cmp of stack pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "R2 pointer comparison",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
bpf: enhance verifier to understand stack pointer arithmetic llvm 4.0 and above generates the code like below: .... 440: (b7) r1 = 15 441: (05) goto pc+73 515: (79) r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -152) 516: (bf) r7 = r10 517: (07) r7 += -112 518: (bf) r2 = r7 519: (0f) r2 += r1 520: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r8 +0) 521: (73) *(u8 *)(r2 +45) = r1 .... and the verifier complains "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'" for insn #521. This is because verifier marks register r2 as unknown value after #519 where r2 is a stack pointer and r1 holds a constant value. Teach verifier to recognize "stack_ptr + imm" and "stack_ptr + reg with const val" as valid stack_ptr with new offset. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-30 05:52:42 +00:00
"stack pointer arithmetic",
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
.insns = {
bpf: enhance verifier to understand stack pointer arithmetic llvm 4.0 and above generates the code like below: .... 440: (b7) r1 = 15 441: (05) goto pc+73 515: (79) r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -152) 516: (bf) r7 = r10 517: (07) r7 += -112 518: (bf) r2 = r7 519: (0f) r2 += r1 520: (71) r1 = *(u8 *)(r8 +0) 521: (73) *(u8 *)(r2 +45) = r1 .... and the verifier complains "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'" for insn #521. This is because verifier marks register r2 as unknown value after #519 where r2 is a stack pointer and r1 holds a constant value. Teach verifier to recognize "stack_ptr + imm" and "stack_ptr + reg with const val" as valid stack_ptr with new offset. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-30 05:52:42 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 4),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, -10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, -10),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_2, 4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_2, 4, 0),
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
{
"raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
/* Call to skb_load_bytes() omitted. */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid read from stack off -8+0 size 8",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, negative len",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, -8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R4 min value is negative",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, negative len 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, ~0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R4 min value is negative",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, zero len",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack type R3",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, 0, 0xcafe),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -16),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 8),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6, 8),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, priority)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -16),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 8),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6, 8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, priority)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, pkt_type)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R3 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -16),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 8),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6, 8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6, 0),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, priority)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -513),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack type R3 off=-513 access_size=8",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack type R3 off=-1 access_size=8",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 0xffffffff),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0xffffffff),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R4 min value is negative",
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0x7fffffff),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R4 unbounded memory access, use 'var &= const' or 'if (var < const)'",
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -512),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0x7fffffff),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R4 unbounded memory access, use 'var &= const' or 'if (var < const)'",
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -512),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid stack type R3 off=-512 access_size=0",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -512),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 512),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf, samples: add test cases for raw stack This adds test cases mostly around ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK to check the verifier behaviour. [...] #84 raw_stack: no skb_load_bytes OK #85 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, no init OK #86 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, init OK #87 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs around bounds OK #88 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption OK #89 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2 OK #90 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data OK #91 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 1 OK #92 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 2 OK #93 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 3 OK #94 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 4 OK #95 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 5 OK #96 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, invalid access 6 OK #97 raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, large access OK Summary: 98 PASSED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-04-12 22:10:54 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
{
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
"direct packet access: test1",
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
"direct packet access: test2",
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 14),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 15),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 7),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 12),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MUL, BPF_REG_4, 14),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_2, 49),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
"direct packet access: test3",
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access off=76",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER,
},
{
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
"direct packet access: test4 (write)",
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
samples/bpf: add verifier tests add few tests for "pointer to packet" logic of the verifier Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-05-06 02:49:15 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: fix range propagation on direct packet access LLVM can generate code that tests for direct packet access via skb->data/data_end in a way that currently gets rejected by the verifier, example: [...] 7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80) 8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76) 9: (bf) r2 = r9 10: (07) r2 += 54 11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12 R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp 12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a 14: (05) goto pc+430 [...] from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp 24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1 25: (b7) r1 = 0 26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1 27: (b7) r2 = 40 28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20) invalid access to packet, off=20 size=1, R9(id=0,off=0,r=0) The reason why this gets rejected despite a proper test is that we currently call find_good_pkt_pointers() only in case where we detect tests like rX > pkt_end, where rX is of type pkt(id=Y,off=Z,r=0) and derived, for example, from a register of type pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=0) pointing to skb->data. find_good_pkt_pointers() then fills the range in the current branch to pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) on success. For above case, we need to extend that to recognize pkt_end >= rX pattern and mark the other branch that is taken on success with the appropriate pkt(id=Y,off=0,r=Z) type via find_good_pkt_pointers(). Since eBPF operates on BPF_JGT (>) and BPF_JGE (>=), these are the only two practical options to test for from what LLVM could have generated, since there's no such thing as BPF_JLT (<) or BPF_JLE (<=) that we would need to take into account as well. After the fix: [...] 7: (61) r3 = *(u32 *)(r6 +80) 8: (61) r9 = *(u32 *)(r6 +76) 9: (bf) r2 = r9 10: (07) r2 += 54 11: (3d) if r3 >= r2 goto pc+12 R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=0) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=0) R10=fp 12: (18) r4 = 0xffffff7a 14: (05) goto pc+430 [...] from 11 to 24: R1=inv R2=pkt(id=0,off=54,r=54) R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp 24: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -40) = r1 25: (b7) r1 = 0 26: (63) *(u32 *)(r6 +56) = r1 27: (b7) r2 = 40 28: (71) r8 = *(u8 *)(r9 +20) 29: (bf) r1 = r8 30: (25) if r8 > 0x3c goto pc+47 R1=inv56 R2=imm40 R3=pkt_end R4=inv R6=ctx R8=inv56 R9=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=54) R10=fp 31: (b7) r1 = 1 [...] Verifier test cases are also added in this work, one that demonstrates the mentioned example here and one that tries a bad packet access for the current/fall-through branch (the one with types pkt(id=X,off=Y,r=0), pkt(id=X,off=0,r=0)), then a case with good and bad accesses, and two with both test variants (>, >=). Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-07 23:03:42 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test5 (pkt_end >= reg, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test6 (pkt_end >= reg, bad access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test7 (pkt_end >= reg, both accesses)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test8 (double test, variant 1)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 4),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test9 (double test, variant 2)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test10 (write invalid)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: enable verifier to better track const alu ops William reported couple of issues in relation to direct packet access. Typical scheme is to check for data + [off] <= data_end, where [off] can be either immediate or coming from a tracked register that contains an immediate, depending on the branch, we can then access the data. However, in case of calculating [off] for either the mentioned test itself or for access after the test in a more "complex" way, then the verifier will stop tracking the CONST_IMM marked register and will mark it as UNKNOWN_VALUE one. Adding that UNKNOWN_VALUE typed register to a pkt() marked register, the verifier then bails out in check_packet_ptr_add() as it finds the registers imm value below 48. In the first below example, that is due to evaluate_reg_imm_alu() not handling right shifts and thus marking the register as UNKNOWN_VALUE via helper __mark_reg_unknown_value() that resets imm to 0. In the second case the same happens at the time when r4 is set to r4 &= r5, where it transitions to UNKNOWN_VALUE from evaluate_reg_imm_alu(). Later on r4 we shift right by 3 inside evaluate_reg_alu(), where the register's imm turns into 3. That is, for registers with type UNKNOWN_VALUE, imm of 0 means that we don't know what value the register has, and for imm > 0 it means that the value has [imm] upper zero bits. F.e. when shifting an UNKNOWN_VALUE register by 3 to the right, no matter what value it had, we know that the 3 upper most bits must be zero now. This is to make sure that ALU operations with unknown registers don't overflow. Meaning, once we know that we have more than 48 upper zero bits, or, in other words cannot go beyond 0xffff offset with ALU ops, such an addition will track the target register as a new pkt() register with a new id, but 0 offset and 0 range, so for that a new data/data_end test will be required. Is the source register a CONST_IMM one that is to be added to the pkt() register, or the source instruction is an add instruction with immediate value, then it will get added if it stays within max 0xffff bounds. >From there, pkt() type, can be accessed should reg->off + imm be within the access range of pkt(). [...] from 28 to 30: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=22) R2=pkt_end R3=imm144,min_value=144,max_value=144 R4=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0 R5=inv48,min_value=2054,max_value=2054 R10=fp 30: (bf) r5 = r3 31: (07) r5 += 23 32: (77) r5 >>= 3 33: (bf) r6 = r1 34: (0f) r6 += r5 cannot add integer value with 0 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet [...] from 52 to 80: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=34) R2=pkt_end R3=inv R4=imm272 R5=inv56,min_value=17,max_value=17 R6=pkt(id=0,off=26,r=34) R10=fp 80: (07) r4 += 71 81: (18) r5 = 0xfffffff8 83: (5f) r4 &= r5 84: (77) r4 >>= 3 85: (0f) r1 += r4 cannot add integer value with 3 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet Thus to get above use-cases working, evaluate_reg_imm_alu() has been extended for further ALU ops. This is fine, because we only operate strictly within realm of CONST_IMM types, so here we don't care about overflows as they will happen in the simulated but also real execution and interaction with pkt() in check_packet_ptr_add() will check actual imm value once added to pkt(), but it's irrelevant before. With regards to 06c1c049721a ("bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory") that works on UNKNOWN_VALUE registers, the verifier becomes now a bit smarter as it can better resolve ALU ops, so we need to adapt two test cases there, as min/max bound tracking only becomes necessary when registers were spilled to stack. So while mask was set before to track upper bound for UNKNOWN_VALUE case, it's now resolved directly as CONST_IMM, and such contructs are only necessary when f.e. registers are spilled. For commit 6b17387307ba ("bpf: recognize 64bit immediate loads as consts") that initially enabled dw load tracking only for nfp jit/ analyzer, I did couple of tests on large, complex programs and we don't increase complexity badly (my tests were in ~3% range on avg). I've added a couple of tests similar to affected code above, and it works fine with verifier now. Reported-by: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Cc: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-24 00:06:30 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test11 (shift, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 22),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 144),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 23),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_5, 3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test12 (and, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 22),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 144),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 23),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_5, 15),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test13 (branches, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 22),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 13),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 14),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 24),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 23),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_5, 15),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: enable verifier to add 0 to packet ptr The patch fixes the case when adding a zero value to the packet pointer. The zero value could come from src_reg equals type BPF_K or CONST_IMM. The patch fixes both, otherwise the verifer reports the following error: [...] R0=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=4) R2=pkt_end R3=fp-12 R4=imm4,min_value=4,max_value=4 R5=pkt(id=0,off=4,r=4) 269: (bf) r2 = r0 // r2 becomes imm0 270: (77) r2 >>= 3 271: (bf) r4 = r1 // r4 becomes pkt ptr 272: (0f) r4 += r2 // r4 += 0 addition of negative constant to packet pointer is not allowed Signed-off-by: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Mihai Budiu <mbudiu@vmware.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-04 16:37:29 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test14 (pkt_ptr += 0, CONST_IMM, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 22),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 7),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 12),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_5, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test15 (spill with xadd)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 4096),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: add various test cases to verifier selftests Add several test cases around ldimm64, fp arithmetic and direct packet access. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-04-26 23:39:32 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test16 (arith on data_end)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, 16),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test17 (pruning, alignment)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 14),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_7, 1, 4),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, -4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_JMP_A(-6),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "misaligned packet access off 2+(0x0; 0x0)+15+-4 size 4",
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.flags = F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
},
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test18 (imm += pkt_ptr, 1)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test19 (imm += pkt_ptr, 2)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test20 (x += pkt_ptr, 1)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0x7fff),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff - 1),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"direct packet access: test21 (x += pkt_ptr, 2)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 9),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_4, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -8),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0x7fff - 1),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"direct packet access: test22 (x += pkt_ptr, 3)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_3, -16),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 11),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_4, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -8),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_4, 49),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"direct packet access: test23 (x += pkt_ptr, 4)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0xffff),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 31),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0xffff - 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid access to packet, off=0 size=8, R5(id=1,off=0,r=0)",
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
},
{
"direct packet access: test24 (x += pkt_ptr, 5)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0xffffffff),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0xff),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 64),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0),
selftests/bpf: don't try to access past MAX_PACKET_OFF in test_verifier A number of selftests fell foul of the changed MAX_PACKET_OFF handling. For instance, "direct packet access: test2" was potentially reading four bytes from pkt + 0xffff, which could take it past the verifier's limit, causing the program to be rejected (checks against pkt_end didn't give us any reg->range). Increase the shifts by one so that R2 is now mask 0x7fff instead of mask 0xffff. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:11 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0x7fff - 1),
bpf: add various test cases for verifier selftest Add couple of verifier test cases for x|imm += pkt_ptr, including the imm += x extension. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-02 00:13:31 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
bpf: add test cases for new BPF_J{LT, LE, SLT, SLE} instructions Add test cases to the verifier selftest suite in order to verify that i) direct packet access, and ii) dynamic map value access is working with the changes related to the new instructions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-09 23:40:03 +00:00
{
"direct packet access: test25 (marking on <, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -4),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test26 (marking on <, bad access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -3),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test27 (marking on <=, good access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JLE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"direct packet access: test28 (marking on <=, bad access)",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JLE, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -4),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
{
"helper access to packet: test1, valid packet_ptr range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 5),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_update_elem),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 5 },
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
.result_unpriv = ACCEPT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test2, unchecked packet_ptr",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 1 },
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test3, variable add",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 10),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 11 },
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test4, packet_ptr with bad range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 4),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 7 },
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test5, packet_ptr with too short range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 3),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 6 },
samples/bpf: add verifier tests for the helper access to the packet test various corner cases of the helper function access to the packet via crafted XDP programs. Signed-off-by: Aaron Yue <haoxuany@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-08-12 01:17:17 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
{
"helper access to packet: test6, cls valid packet_ptr range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 5),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_update_elem),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 5 },
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test7, cls unchecked packet_ptr",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 1 },
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test8, cls variable add",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 10),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 11 },
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test9, cls packet_ptr with bad range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 4),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 7 },
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test10, cls packet_ptr with too short range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 3),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map1 = { 6 },
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test11, cls unsuitable helper 1",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_7, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 42),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_store_bytes),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "helper access to the packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test12, cls unsuitable helper 2",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_7, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 4),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "helper access to the packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test13, cls helper ok",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test14, cls helper ok sub",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to packet: test15, cls helper fail sub",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, 12),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test16, cls helper fail range 1",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test17, cls helper fail range 2",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -9),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test18, cls helper fail range 3",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, ~0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test19, cls helper fail range zero",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test20, pkt end as input",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 type=pkt_end expected=fp",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"helper access to packet: test21, wrong reg",
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_7, 6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
bpf: add test cases for direct packet access Add couple of test cases for direct write and the negative size issue, and also adjust the direct packet access test4 since it asserts that writes are not possible, but since we've just added support for writes, we need to invert the verdict to ACCEPT, of course. Summary: 133 PASSED, 0 FAILED. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-19 22:26:14 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
{
"valid map access into an array with a constant",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"valid map access into an array with a register",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"valid map access into an array with a variable",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, MAX_ENTRIES, 3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"valid map access into an array with a signed variable",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 0xffffffff, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_2, MAX_ENTRIES),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a constant",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, (MAX_ENTRIES + 1) << 2,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=48 size=8",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a register",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, MAX_ENTRIES + 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 min value is outside of the array range",
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a variable",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access, make sure to bounds check any array access into a map",
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with no floor check",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_2, MAX_ENTRIES),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a invalid max check",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_2, MAX_ENTRIES + 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=44 size=8",
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a invalid max check",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 10),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_8),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.fixup_map2 = { 3, 11 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer += pointer",
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
},
bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers A BPF program is required to check the return register of a map_elem_lookup() call before accessing memory. The verifier keeps track of this by converting the type of the result register from PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE after a conditional jump ensures safety. This check is currently exclusively performed for the result register 0. In the event the compiler reorders instructions, BPF_MOV64_REG instructions may be moved before the conditional jump which causes them to keep their type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to which the verifier objects when the register is accessed: 0: (b7) r1 = 10 1: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1 2: (bf) r2 = r10 3: (07) r2 += -8 4: (18) r1 = 0x59c00000 6: (85) call 1 7: (bf) r4 = r0 8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1 R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8) R4=map_value_or_null(ks=8,vs=8) R10=fp 9: (7a) *(u64 *)(r4 +0) = 0 R4 invalid mem access 'map_value_or_null' This commit extends the verifier to keep track of all identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers after a map_elem_lookup() by assigning them an ID and then marking them all when the conditional jump is observed. Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-18 17:51:19 +00:00
{
"multiple registers share map_lookup_elem result",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
{
"alu ops on ptr_to_map_value_or_null, 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, -2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
{
"alu ops on ptr_to_map_value_or_null, 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_4, -1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
{
"alu ops on ptr_to_map_value_or_null, 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_4, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
bpf: Detect identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers A BPF program is required to check the return register of a map_elem_lookup() call before accessing memory. The verifier keeps track of this by converting the type of the result register from PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE after a conditional jump ensures safety. This check is currently exclusively performed for the result register 0. In the event the compiler reorders instructions, BPF_MOV64_REG instructions may be moved before the conditional jump which causes them to keep their type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL to which the verifier objects when the register is accessed: 0: (b7) r1 = 10 1: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1 2: (bf) r2 = r10 3: (07) r2 += -8 4: (18) r1 = 0x59c00000 6: (85) call 1 7: (bf) r4 = r0 8: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+1 R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8) R4=map_value_or_null(ks=8,vs=8) R10=fp 9: (7a) *(u64 *)(r4 +0) = 0 R4 invalid mem access 'map_value_or_null' This commit extends the verifier to keep track of all identical PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL registers after a map_elem_lookup() by assigning them an ID and then marking them all when the conditional jump is observed. Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Reviewed-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-18 17:51:19 +00:00
{
"invalid memory access with multiple map_lookup_elem calls",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R4 !read_ok",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
{
"valid indirect map_lookup_elem access with 2nd lookup in branch",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 10),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 10),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_2, 0, 3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS
},
bpf: add test for the verifier equal logic bug This is a test to verify that bpf: fix states equal logic for varlen access actually fixed the problem. The problem was if the register we added to our map register was UNKNOWN in both the false and true branches and the only thing that changed was the range then we'd incorrectly assume that the true branch was valid, which it really wasnt. This tests this case and properly fails without my fix in place and passes with it in place. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-11-29 17:35:19 +00:00
{
"invalid map access from else condition",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, MAX_ENTRIES-1, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
bpf: add test for the verifier equal logic bug This is a test to verify that bpf: fix states equal logic for varlen access actually fixed the problem. The problem was if the register we added to our map register was UNKNOWN in both the false and true branches and the only thing that changed was the range then we'd incorrectly assume that the true branch was valid, which it really wasnt. This tests this case and properly fails without my fix in place and passes with it in place. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-11-29 17:35:19 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: add test for the verifier equal logic bug This is a test to verify that bpf: fix states equal logic for varlen access actually fixed the problem. The problem was if the register we added to our map register was UNKNOWN in both the false and true branches and the only thing that changed was the range then we'd incorrectly assume that the true branch was valid, which it really wasnt. This tests this case and properly fails without my fix in place and passes with it in place. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-11-29 17:35:19 +00:00
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: add test for the verifier equal logic bug This is a test to verify that bpf: fix states equal logic for varlen access actually fixed the problem. The problem was if the register we added to our map register was UNKNOWN in both the false and true branches and the only thing that changed was the range then we'd incorrectly assume that the true branch was valid, which it really wasnt. This tests this case and properly fails without my fix in place and passes with it in place. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-11-29 17:35:19 +00:00
},
bpf: Preserve const register type on const OR alu ops Occasionally, clang (e.g. version 3.8.1) translates a sum between two constant operands using a BPF_OR instead of a BPF_ADD. The verifier is currently not handling this scenario, and the destination register type becomes UNKNOWN_VALUE even if it's still storing a constant. As a result, the destination register cannot be used as argument to a helper function expecting a ARG_CONST_STACK_*, limiting some use cases. Modify the verifier to handle this case, and add a few tests to make sure all combinations are supported, and stack boundaries are still verified even with BPF_OR. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-12-03 20:31:33 +00:00
{
"constant register |= constant should keep constant type",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -48),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 34),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_OR, BPF_REG_2, 13),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"constant register |= constant should not bypass stack boundary checks",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -48),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 34),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_OR, BPF_REG_2, 24),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-48 access_size=58",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"constant register |= constant register should keep constant type",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -48),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 34),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 13),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_OR, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"constant register |= constant register should not bypass stack boundary checks",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -48),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 34),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 24),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_OR, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-48 access_size=58",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
bpf: add additional verifier tests for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_* - direct packet read is allowed for LWT_* - direct packet write for LWT_IN/LWT_OUT is prohibited - direct packet write for LWT_XMIT is allowed - access to skb->tc_classid is prohibited for LWT_* Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-12-05 09:30:52 +00:00
{
"invalid direct packet write for LWT_IN",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "cannot write into packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
{
"invalid direct packet write for LWT_OUT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "cannot write into packet",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_OUT,
},
{
"direct packet write for LWT_XMIT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_XMIT,
},
{
"direct packet read for LWT_IN",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
{
"direct packet read for LWT_OUT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_OUT,
},
{
"direct packet read for LWT_XMIT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_XMIT,
},
bpf: improve verifier packet range checks llvm can optimize the 'if (ptr > data_end)' checks to be in the order slightly different than the original C code which will confuse verifier. Like: if (ptr + 16 > data_end) return TC_ACT_SHOT; // may be followed by if (ptr + 14 > data_end) return TC_ACT_SHOT; while llvm can see that 'ptr' is valid for all 16 bytes, the verifier could not. Fix verifier logic to account for such case and add a test. Reported-by: Huapeng Zhou <hzhou@fb.com> Fixes: 969bf05eb3ce ("bpf: direct packet access") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-24 22:57:33 +00:00
{
"overlapping checks for direct packet access",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 6),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
bpf: add additional verifier tests for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_* - direct packet read is allowed for LWT_* - direct packet write for LWT_IN/LWT_OUT is prohibited - direct packet write for LWT_XMIT is allowed - access to skb->tc_classid is prohibited for LWT_* Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-12-05 09:30:52 +00:00
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_XMIT,
},
{
"invalid access of tc_classid for LWT_IN",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
},
{
"invalid access of tc_classid for LWT_OUT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
},
{
"invalid access of tc_classid for LWT_XMIT",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
},
bpf: prevent leaking pointer via xadd on unpriviledged Leaking kernel addresses on unpriviledged is generally disallowed, for example, verifier rejects the following: 0: (b7) r0 = 0 1: (18) r2 = 0xffff897e82304400 3: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +48) = r2 R2 leaks addr into ctx Doing pointer arithmetic on them is also forbidden, so that they don't turn into unknown value and then get leaked out. However, there's xadd as a special case, where we don't check the src reg for being a pointer register, e.g. the following will pass: 0: (b7) r0 = 0 1: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +48) = r0 2: (18) r2 = 0xffff897e82304400 ; map 4: (db) lock *(u64 *)(r1 +48) += r2 5: (95) exit We could store the pointer into skb->cb, loose the type context, and then read it out from there again to leak it eventually out of a map value. Or more easily in a different variant, too: 0: (bf) r6 = r1 1: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 2: (bf) r2 = r10 3: (07) r2 += -8 4: (18) r1 = 0x0 6: (85) call bpf_map_lookup_elem#1 7: (15) if r0 == 0x0 goto pc+3 R0=map_value(ks=8,vs=8,id=0),min_value=0,max_value=0 R6=ctx R10=fp 8: (b7) r3 = 0 9: (7b) *(u64 *)(r0 +0) = r3 10: (db) lock *(u64 *)(r0 +0) += r6 11: (b7) r0 = 0 12: (95) exit from 7 to 11: R0=inv,min_value=0,max_value=0 R6=ctx R10=fp 11: (b7) r0 = 0 12: (95) exit Prevent this by checking xadd src reg for pointer types. Also add a couple of test cases related to this. Fixes: 1be7f75d1668 ("bpf: enable non-root eBPF programs") Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-29 01:04:59 +00:00
{
"leak pointer into ctx 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 2 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R2 leaks addr into mem",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"leak pointer into ctx 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr_unpriv = "R10 leaks addr into mem",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"leak pointer into ctx 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, cb[0])),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 1 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R2 leaks addr into ctx",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"leak pointer into map val",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R6 leaks addr into mem",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
},
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
{
"helper access to map: full range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: partial range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: empty range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=0 size=0",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: out-of-bound range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val) + 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=0 size=56",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: negative range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): full range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): partial range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): empty range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=4 size=0",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): out-of-bound range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo) + 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=4 size=52",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): negative range (> adjustment)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const imm): negative range (< adjustment)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): full range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): partial range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): empty range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R1 min value is outside of the array range",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): out-of-bound range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo) + 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=4 size=52",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): negative range (> adjustment)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via const reg): negative range (< adjustment)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via variable): full range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo), 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via variable): partial range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo), 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via variable): empty range",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo), 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R1 min value is outside of the array range",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via variable): no max check",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R1 unbounded memory access",
bpf: allow helpers access to map element values Enable helpers to directly access a map element value by passing a register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE (or PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ) to helper arguments ARG_PTR_TO_STACK or ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK. This enables several use cases. For example, a typical tracing program might want to capture pathnames passed to sys_open() with: struct trace_data { char pathname[PATHLEN]; }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") void bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { struct trace_data data; bpf_probe_read(data.pathname, sizeof(data.pathname), ctx->di); /* consume data.pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } Such a program could easily hit the stack limit in case PATHLEN needs to be large or more local variables need to exist, both of which are quite common scenarios. Allowing direct helper access to map element values, one could do: struct bpf_map_def SEC("maps") scratch_map = { .type = BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY, .key_size = sizeof(u32), .value_size = sizeof(struct trace_data), .max_entries = 1, }; SEC("kprobe/sys_open") int bpf_sys_open(struct pt_regs *ctx) { int id = 0; struct trace_data *p = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&scratch_map, &id); if (!p) return; bpf_probe_read(p->pathname, sizeof(p->pathname), ctx->di); /* consume p->pathname, for example via * bpf_trace_printk() or bpf_perf_event_output() */ } And wouldn't risk exhausting the stack. Code changes are loosely modeled after commit 6841de8b0d03 ("bpf: allow helpers access the packet directly"). Unlike with PTR_TO_PACKET, these changes just work with ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK (not ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_KEY, ARG_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE, ...): adding those would be trivial, but since there is not currently a use case for that, it's reasonable to limit the set of changes. Also, add new tests to make sure accesses to map element values from helpers never go out of boundary, even when adjusted. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:47 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to adjusted map (via variable): wrong max check",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo), 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) -
offsetof(struct test_val, foo) + 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=4 size=45",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
bpf: add test cases for new BPF_J{LT, LE, SLT, SLE} instructions Add test cases to the verifier selftest suite in order to verify that i) direct packet access, and ii) dynamic map value access is working with the changes related to the new instructions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-09 23:40:03 +00:00
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using <, good access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JLT, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using <, bad access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JLT, BPF_REG_3, 32, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 unbounded memory access",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using <=, good access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JLE, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using <=, bad access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JLE, BPF_REG_3, 32, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 unbounded memory access",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<, good access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, 0, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<, good access 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, -3, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<, bad access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_3, -3, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 min value is negative",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<=, good access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, 0, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<=, good access 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, -3, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to map: bounds check using s<=, bad access",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, 32, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSLE, BPF_REG_3, -3, -3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R1 min value is negative",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
bpf: allow adjusted map element values to spill commit 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays") introduces the ability to do pointer math inside a map element value via the PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ register type. The current support doesn't handle the case where a PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ is spilled into the stack, limiting several use cases, especially when generating bpf code from a compiler. Handle this case by explicitly enabling the register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ to be spilled. Also, make sure that min_value and max_value are reset just for BPF_LDX operations that don't result in a restore of a spilled register from stack. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:48 +00:00
{
"map element value is preserved across register spilling",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 42),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -184),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, 0, 42),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
"map element value or null is marked on register spilling",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -152),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, 0, 42),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value store of cleared call register",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 !read_ok",
.errstr = "R1 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value with unaligned store",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 17),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 42),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 2, 43),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, -2, 44),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 0, 32),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 2, 33),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, -2, 34),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_8, 5),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 0, 22),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 4, 23),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, -7, 24),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, 3),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, 0, 22),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, 4, 23),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, -4, 24),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"map element value with unaligned load",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 11),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, MAX_ENTRIES, 9),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 3),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8, 2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 5),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 bitwise operator &= on pointer",
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 32-bit pointer arithmetic prohibited",
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_DIV, BPF_REG_0, 42),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic with /= operator",
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 4",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
BPF_ENDIAN(BPF_FROM_BE, BPF_REG_0, 64),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value illegal alu op, 5",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 4096),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"map element value is preserved across register spilling",
bpf: allow adjusted map element values to spill commit 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays") introduces the ability to do pointer math inside a map element value via the PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ register type. The current support doesn't handle the case where a PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ is spilled into the stack, limiting several use cases, especially when generating bpf code from a compiler. Handle this case by explicitly enabling the register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ to be spilled. Also, make sure that min_value and max_value are reset just for BPF_LDX operations that don't result in a restore of a spilled register from stack. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:48 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 42),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -184),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, 0, 42),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
bpf: allow adjusted map element values to spill commit 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays") introduces the ability to do pointer math inside a map element value via the PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ register type. The current support doesn't handle the case where a PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ is spilled into the stack, limiting several use cases, especially when generating bpf code from a compiler. Handle this case by explicitly enabling the register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ to be spilled. Also, make sure that min_value and max_value are reset just for BPF_LDX operations that don't result in a restore of a spilled register from stack. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:48 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: allow adjusted map element values to spill commit 484611357c19 ("bpf: allow access into map value arrays") introduces the ability to do pointer math inside a map element value via the PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ register type. The current support doesn't handle the case where a PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ is spilled into the stack, limiting several use cases, especially when generating bpf code from a compiler. Handle this case by explicitly enabling the register type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_ADJ to be spilled. Also, make sure that min_value and max_value are reset just for BPF_LDX operations that don't result in a restore of a spilled register from stack. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:48 +00:00
},
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, bitwise AND + JMP, correct bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -64),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -56),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -48),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -40),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -32),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, bitwise AND, zero included",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-64 access_size=0",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, bitwise AND + JMP, wrong max",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 65),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-64 access_size=65",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP, correct bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -64),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -56),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -48),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -40),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -32),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, 64, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP (signed), correct bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -64),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -56),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -48),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -40),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -32),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2, 64, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP, bounds + offset",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, 64, 5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-64 access_size=65",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP, wrong max",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, 65, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-64 access_size=65",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP, no max check",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
/* because max wasn't checked, signed min is negative */
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative, either use unsigned or 'var &= const'",
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP, no min check",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, 64, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-64 access_size=0",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, JMP (signed), no min check",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2, 64, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R2 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: map, JMP, correct bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 10),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val), 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: fix up test cases with mixed signed/unsigned bounds Fix the few existing test cases that used mixed signed/unsigned bounds and switch them only to one flavor. Reason why we need this is that proper boundaries cannot be derived from mixed tests. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:23 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: map, JMP, wrong max",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 10),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) + 1, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: fix up test cases with mixed signed/unsigned bounds Fix the few existing test cases that used mixed signed/unsigned bounds and switch them only to one flavor. Reason why we need this is that proper boundaries cannot be derived from mixed tests. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:23 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=0 size=49",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: map adjusted, JMP, correct bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 11),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 20),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) - 20, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: fix up test cases with mixed signed/unsigned bounds Fix the few existing test cases that used mixed signed/unsigned bounds and switch them only to one flavor. Reason why we need this is that proper boundaries cannot be derived from mixed tests. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:23 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: map adjusted, JMP, wrong max",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 11),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 20),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, sizeof(struct test_val)),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2,
sizeof(struct test_val) - 19, 4),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
bpf: fix up test cases with mixed signed/unsigned bounds Fix the few existing test cases that used mixed signed/unsigned bounds and switch them only to one flavor. Reason why we need this is that proper boundaries cannot be derived from mixed tests. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:23 +00:00
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGE, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 2),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R1 min value is outside of the array range",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
{
"helper access to variable memory: size = 0 allowed on NULL",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
{
"helper access to variable memory: size > 0 not allowed on NULL",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
bpf: enable verifier to better track const alu ops William reported couple of issues in relation to direct packet access. Typical scheme is to check for data + [off] <= data_end, where [off] can be either immediate or coming from a tracked register that contains an immediate, depending on the branch, we can then access the data. However, in case of calculating [off] for either the mentioned test itself or for access after the test in a more "complex" way, then the verifier will stop tracking the CONST_IMM marked register and will mark it as UNKNOWN_VALUE one. Adding that UNKNOWN_VALUE typed register to a pkt() marked register, the verifier then bails out in check_packet_ptr_add() as it finds the registers imm value below 48. In the first below example, that is due to evaluate_reg_imm_alu() not handling right shifts and thus marking the register as UNKNOWN_VALUE via helper __mark_reg_unknown_value() that resets imm to 0. In the second case the same happens at the time when r4 is set to r4 &= r5, where it transitions to UNKNOWN_VALUE from evaluate_reg_imm_alu(). Later on r4 we shift right by 3 inside evaluate_reg_alu(), where the register's imm turns into 3. That is, for registers with type UNKNOWN_VALUE, imm of 0 means that we don't know what value the register has, and for imm > 0 it means that the value has [imm] upper zero bits. F.e. when shifting an UNKNOWN_VALUE register by 3 to the right, no matter what value it had, we know that the 3 upper most bits must be zero now. This is to make sure that ALU operations with unknown registers don't overflow. Meaning, once we know that we have more than 48 upper zero bits, or, in other words cannot go beyond 0xffff offset with ALU ops, such an addition will track the target register as a new pkt() register with a new id, but 0 offset and 0 range, so for that a new data/data_end test will be required. Is the source register a CONST_IMM one that is to be added to the pkt() register, or the source instruction is an add instruction with immediate value, then it will get added if it stays within max 0xffff bounds. >From there, pkt() type, can be accessed should reg->off + imm be within the access range of pkt(). [...] from 28 to 30: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=22) R2=pkt_end R3=imm144,min_value=144,max_value=144 R4=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0 R5=inv48,min_value=2054,max_value=2054 R10=fp 30: (bf) r5 = r3 31: (07) r5 += 23 32: (77) r5 >>= 3 33: (bf) r6 = r1 34: (0f) r6 += r5 cannot add integer value with 0 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet [...] from 52 to 80: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=34) R2=pkt_end R3=inv R4=imm272 R5=inv56,min_value=17,max_value=17 R6=pkt(id=0,off=26,r=34) R10=fp 80: (07) r4 += 71 81: (18) r5 = 0xfffffff8 83: (5f) r4 &= r5 84: (77) r4 >>= 3 85: (0f) r1 += r4 cannot add integer value with 3 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet Thus to get above use-cases working, evaluate_reg_imm_alu() has been extended for further ALU ops. This is fine, because we only operate strictly within realm of CONST_IMM types, so here we don't care about overflows as they will happen in the simulated but also real execution and interaction with pkt() in check_packet_ptr_add() will check actual imm value once added to pkt(), but it's irrelevant before. With regards to 06c1c049721a ("bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory") that works on UNKNOWN_VALUE registers, the verifier becomes now a bit smarter as it can better resolve ALU ops, so we need to adapt two test cases there, as min/max bound tracking only becomes necessary when registers were spilled to stack. So while mask was set before to track upper bound for UNKNOWN_VALUE case, it's now resolved directly as CONST_IMM, and such contructs are only necessary when f.e. registers are spilled. For commit 6b17387307ba ("bpf: recognize 64bit immediate loads as consts") that initially enabled dw load tracking only for nfp jit/ analyzer, I did couple of tests on large, complex programs and we don't increase complexity badly (my tests were in ~3% range on avg). I've added a couple of tests similar to affected code above, and it works fine with verifier now. Reported-by: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Cc: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-24 00:06:30 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R1 type=inv expected=fp",
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: size = 0 not allowed on != NULL",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_csum_diff),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid stack type R1 off=-8 access_size=0",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: 8 bytes leak",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -64),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -56),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -48),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -40),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
bpf: enable verifier to better track const alu ops William reported couple of issues in relation to direct packet access. Typical scheme is to check for data + [off] <= data_end, where [off] can be either immediate or coming from a tracked register that contains an immediate, depending on the branch, we can then access the data. However, in case of calculating [off] for either the mentioned test itself or for access after the test in a more "complex" way, then the verifier will stop tracking the CONST_IMM marked register and will mark it as UNKNOWN_VALUE one. Adding that UNKNOWN_VALUE typed register to a pkt() marked register, the verifier then bails out in check_packet_ptr_add() as it finds the registers imm value below 48. In the first below example, that is due to evaluate_reg_imm_alu() not handling right shifts and thus marking the register as UNKNOWN_VALUE via helper __mark_reg_unknown_value() that resets imm to 0. In the second case the same happens at the time when r4 is set to r4 &= r5, where it transitions to UNKNOWN_VALUE from evaluate_reg_imm_alu(). Later on r4 we shift right by 3 inside evaluate_reg_alu(), where the register's imm turns into 3. That is, for registers with type UNKNOWN_VALUE, imm of 0 means that we don't know what value the register has, and for imm > 0 it means that the value has [imm] upper zero bits. F.e. when shifting an UNKNOWN_VALUE register by 3 to the right, no matter what value it had, we know that the 3 upper most bits must be zero now. This is to make sure that ALU operations with unknown registers don't overflow. Meaning, once we know that we have more than 48 upper zero bits, or, in other words cannot go beyond 0xffff offset with ALU ops, such an addition will track the target register as a new pkt() register with a new id, but 0 offset and 0 range, so for that a new data/data_end test will be required. Is the source register a CONST_IMM one that is to be added to the pkt() register, or the source instruction is an add instruction with immediate value, then it will get added if it stays within max 0xffff bounds. >From there, pkt() type, can be accessed should reg->off + imm be within the access range of pkt(). [...] from 28 to 30: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=22) R2=pkt_end R3=imm144,min_value=144,max_value=144 R4=imm0,min_value=0,max_value=0 R5=inv48,min_value=2054,max_value=2054 R10=fp 30: (bf) r5 = r3 31: (07) r5 += 23 32: (77) r5 >>= 3 33: (bf) r6 = r1 34: (0f) r6 += r5 cannot add integer value with 0 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet [...] from 52 to 80: R0=imm1,min_value=1,max_value=1 R1=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=34) R2=pkt_end R3=inv R4=imm272 R5=inv56,min_value=17,max_value=17 R6=pkt(id=0,off=26,r=34) R10=fp 80: (07) r4 += 71 81: (18) r5 = 0xfffffff8 83: (5f) r4 &= r5 84: (77) r4 >>= 3 85: (0f) r1 += r4 cannot add integer value with 3 upper zero bits to ptr_to_packet Thus to get above use-cases working, evaluate_reg_imm_alu() has been extended for further ALU ops. This is fine, because we only operate strictly within realm of CONST_IMM types, so here we don't care about overflows as they will happen in the simulated but also real execution and interaction with pkt() in check_packet_ptr_add() will check actual imm value once added to pkt(), but it's irrelevant before. With regards to 06c1c049721a ("bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory") that works on UNKNOWN_VALUE registers, the verifier becomes now a bit smarter as it can better resolve ALU ops, so we need to adapt two test cases there, as min/max bound tracking only becomes necessary when registers were spilled to stack. So while mask was set before to track upper bound for UNKNOWN_VALUE case, it's now resolved directly as CONST_IMM, and such contructs are only necessary when f.e. registers are spilled. For commit 6b17387307ba ("bpf: recognize 64bit immediate loads as consts") that initially enabled dw load tracking only for nfp jit/ analyzer, I did couple of tests on large, complex programs and we don't increase complexity badly (my tests were in ~3% range on avg). I've added a couple of tests similar to affected code above, and it works fine with verifier now. Reported-by: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Cc: William Tu <u9012063@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-24 00:06:30 +00:00
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_2, -128),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10, -128),
bpf: allow helpers access to variable memory Currently, helpers that read and write from/to the stack can do so using a pair of arguments of type ARG_PTR_TO_STACK and ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE. ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE accepts a constant register of type CONST_IMM, so that the verifier can safely check the memory access. However, requiring the argument to be a constant can be limiting in some circumstances. Since the current logic keeps track of the minimum and maximum value of a register throughout the simulated execution, ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE can be changed to also accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register in case its boundaries have been set and the range doesn't cause invalid memory accesses. One common situation when this is useful: int len; char buf[BUFSIZE]; /* BUFSIZE is 128 */ if (some_condition) len = 42; else len = 84; some_helper(..., buf, len & (BUFSIZE - 1)); The compiler can often decide to assign the constant values 42 or 48 into a variable on the stack, instead of keeping it in a register. When the variable is then read back from stack into the register in order to be passed to the helper, the verifier will not be able to recognize the register as constant (the verifier is not currently tracking all constant writes into memory), and the program won't be valid. However, by allowing the helper to accept an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, this program will work because the bitwise AND operation will set the range of possible values for the UNKNOWN_VALUE register to [0, BUFSIZE), so the verifier can guarantee the helper call will be safe (assuming the argument is of type ARG_CONST_STACK_SIZE_OR_ZERO, otherwise one more check against 0 would be needed). Custom ranges can be set not only with ALU operations, but also by explicitly comparing the UNKNOWN_VALUE register with constants. Another very common example happens when intercepting system call arguments and accessing user-provided data of variable size using bpf_probe_read(). One can load at runtime the user-provided length in an UNKNOWN_VALUE register, and then read that exact amount of data up to a compile-time determined limit in order to fit into the proper local storage allocated on the stack, without having to guess a suboptimal access size at compile time. Also, in case the helpers accepting the UNKNOWN_VALUE register operate in raw mode, disable the raw mode so that the program is required to initialize all memory, since there is no guarantee the helper will fill it completely, leaving possibilities for data leak (just relevant when the memory used by the helper is the stack, not when using a pointer to map element value or packet). In other words, ARG_PTR_TO_RAW_STACK will be treated as ARG_PTR_TO_STACK. Signed-off-by: Gianluca Borello <g.borello@gmail.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-01-09 18:19:49 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 63),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "invalid indirect read from stack off -64+32 size 64",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: 8 bytes no leak (init memory)",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -64),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -56),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -48),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -40),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -32),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -16),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_0, -8),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -64),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 32),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, 32),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_probe_read),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
},
bpf: test for AND edge cases These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that resulted in the commit. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-03 21:25:23 +00:00
{
"invalid and of negative number",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: test for AND edge cases These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that resulted in the commit. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-03 21:25:23 +00:00
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_1, -4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 max value is outside of the array range",
bpf: test for AND edge cases These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that resulted in the commit. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-03 21:25:23 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: test for AND edge cases These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that resulted in the commit. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-03 21:25:23 +00:00
},
{
"invalid range check",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 12),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_9, 1),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOD, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_9, 1),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_9, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_9),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MUL, BPF_REG_3, 0x10000000),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 max value is outside of the array range",
bpf: test for AND edge cases These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that resulted in the commit. Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-03 21:25:23 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
},
{
"map in map access",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 5),
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map_in_map = { 3 },
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"invalid inner map pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map_in_map = { 3 },
.errstr = "R1 type=inv expected=map_ptr",
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R1 pointer arithmetic on CONST_PTR_TO_MAP prohibited",
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"forgot null checking on the inner map pointer",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_ST_MEM(0, BPF_REG_10, -4, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map_in_map = { 3 },
.errstr = "R1 type=map_value_or_null expected=map_ptr",
.result = REJECT,
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R1 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R2 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R3 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r4",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R4 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r5",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R5 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_abs: check calling conv, r7",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_7, 0),
BPF_LD_ABS(BPF_W, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r1",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R1 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r2",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R2 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r3",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R3 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r4",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_4, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R4 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r5",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_5, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R5 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"ld_ind: check calling conv, r7",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_7, 1),
BPF_LD_IND(BPF_W, BPF_REG_7, -0x200000),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
},
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
{
"check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period byte load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period) + 7),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
},
{
"check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period half load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period) + 6),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
},
{
"check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period word load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period) + 4),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
},
{
"check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period dword load permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
},
{
"check skb->data half load not permitted",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data) + 2),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
},
{
"check skb->tc_classid half load not permitted for lwt prog",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN. E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h. After that, suite passes for me: ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...] Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-04 20:24:41 +00:00
#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads Add test cases in test_verifier and test_progs. Negative tests are added in test_verifier as well. The test in test_progs will compare the value of narrower ctx field load result vs. the masked value of normal full-field load result, and will fail if they are not the same. Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 22:52:14 +00:00
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
#else
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid) + 2),
#endif
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
bpf: add test for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks These failed due to a bug in verifier bounds handling. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:24 +00:00
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, positive bounds",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 4, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 2",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 5),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_8, 0),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_8, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_8, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R8 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 3",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_8, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_8, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R8 invalid mem access 'inv'",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 4",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 5",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 5),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 6",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, -512),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_6, 5),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_4, 1, 4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_10, -512, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_skb_load_bytes),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R4 min value is negative, either use unsigned",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 7",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 1024 * 1024 * 1024),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
},
{
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 8",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 9",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 10),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_2, -9223372036854775808ULL),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.result = ACCEPT,
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 10",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 11",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
/* Dead branch. */
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 12",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 13",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 6),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, 2),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_7, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_7, 0, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_7, 4, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 14",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_9, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct __sk_buff, mark)),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 8),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_8, 2),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_9, 42, 6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_1, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_1, 1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, -3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, -7),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 4 },
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"bounds checks mixing signed and unsigned, variant 15",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 4),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -16, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -16),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -6),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, 1, 2),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer comparison prohibited",
bpf: more tests for mixed signed and unsigned bounds checks Add a couple of more test cases to BPF selftests that are related to mixed signed and unsigned checks. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:25 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
selftests/bpf: subtraction bounds test There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus allowed accesses; whereas the correct handling will give a range of [-255, 255] (and hence the right-shift will give a range of [0, 255]) and the accesses will be rejected. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-21 13:36:57 +00:00
{
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
"subtraction bounds (map value) variant 1",
selftests/bpf: subtraction bounds test There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus allowed accesses; whereas the correct handling will give a range of [-255, 255] (and hence the right-shift will give a range of [0, 255]) and the accesses will be rejected. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-21 13:36:57 +00:00
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 9),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, 0xff, 7),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3, 0xff, 5),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, BPF_REG_1, 56),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:27:12 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 max value is outside of the array range",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"subtraction bounds (map value) variant 2",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, 0xff, 6),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_3, 0xff, 4),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map1 = { 3 },
selftests/bpf: subtraction bounds test There is a bug in the verifier's handling of BPF_SUB: [a,b] - [c,d] yields was [a-c, b-d] rather than the correct [a-d, b-c]. So here is a test which, with the bogus handling, will produce ranges of [0,0] and thus allowed accesses; whereas the correct handling will give a range of [-255, 255] (and hence the right-shift will give a range of [0, 255]) and the accesses will be rejected. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-21 13:36:57 +00:00
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result = REJECT,
},
selftests/bpf: variable offset negative tests Variable ctx accesses and stack accesses aren't allowed, because we can't determine what type of value will be read. Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-07 14:29:51 +00:00
{
"variable-offset ctx access",
.insns = {
/* Get an unknown value */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 0),
/* Make it small and 4-byte aligned */
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 4),
/* add it to skb. We now have either &skb->len or
* &skb->pkt_type, but we don't know which
*/
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2),
/* dereference it */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "variable ctx access var_off=(0x0; 0x4)",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
{
"variable-offset stack access",
.insns = {
/* Fill the top 8 bytes of the stack */
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
/* Get an unknown value */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 0),
/* Make it small and 4-byte aligned */
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_2, 4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_2, 8),
/* add it to fp. We now have either fp-4 or fp-8, but
* we don't know which
*/
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
/* dereference it */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "variable stack access var_off=(0xfffffffffffffff8; 0x4)",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
selftests/bpf: add a test for a bug in liveness-based pruning Writes in straight-line code should not prevent reads from propagating along jumps. With current verifier code, the jump from 3 to 5 does not add a read mark on 3:R0 (because 5:R0 has a write mark), meaning that the jump from 1 to 3 gets pruned as safe even though R0 is NOT_INIT. Verifier output: 0: (61) r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) 1: (35) if r2 >= 0x0 goto pc+1 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R10=fp0 2: (b7) r0 = 0 3: (35) if r2 >= 0x0 goto pc+1 R0=inv0 R1=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0) R2=inv(id=0,umax_value=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R10=fp0 4: (b7) r0 = 0 5: (95) exit from 3 to 5: safe from 1 to 3: safe processed 8 insns, stack depth 0 Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-23 14:09:46 +00:00
{
"liveness pruning and write screening",
.insns = {
/* Get an unknown value */
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 0),
/* branch conditions teach us nothing about R2 */
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, 0, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_2, 0, 1),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "R0 !read_ok",
.result = REJECT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_LWT_IN,
},
selftests/bpf: add a test for a pruning bug in the verifier The test makes a read through a map value pointer, then considers pruning a branch where the register holds an adjusted map value pointer. It should not prune, but currently it does. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> [ecree@solarflare.com: added test-name and patch description] Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-08-23 14:10:26 +00:00
{
"varlen_map_value_access pruning",
.insns = {
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_2, MAX_ENTRIES),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSGT, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, 1),
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_1, 2),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0,
offsetof(struct test_val, foo)),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.fixup_map2 = { 3 },
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
.errstr = "R0 unbounded memory access",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
bpf/verifier: reject BPF_ALU64|BPF_END Neither ___bpf_prog_run nor the JITs accept it. Also adds a new test case. Fixes: 17a5267067f3 ("bpf: verifier (add verifier core)") Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-09-15 13:37:38 +00:00
{
"invalid 64-bit BPF_END",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
{
.code = BPF_ALU64 | BPF_END | BPF_TO_LE,
.dst_reg = BPF_REG_0,
.src_reg = 0,
.off = 0,
.imm = 32,
},
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.errstr = "BPF_END uses reserved fields",
.result = REJECT,
},
bpf: improve selftests and add tests for meta pointer Add various test_verifier selftests, and a simple xdp/tc functional test that is being attached to veths. Also let new versions of clang use the recently added -mcpu=probe support [1] for the BPF target, so that it can probe the underlying kernel for BPF insn set extensions. We could also just set this options always, where older versions just ignore it and give a note to the user that the -mcpu value is not supported, but given emitting the note cannot be turned off from clang side lets not confuse users running selftests with it, thus fallback to the default generic one when we see that clang doesn't support it. Also allow CPU option to be overridden in the Makefile from command line. [1] https://github.com/llvm-mirror/llvm/commit/d7276a40d87b89aed89978dec6457a5b8b3a0db5 Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-09-25 00:25:53 +00:00
{
"meta access, test1",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test2",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_SUB, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet, off=-8",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test3",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test4",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test5",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_4, 3),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_2, -8),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0,
BPF_FUNC_xdp_adjust_meta),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R3 !read_ok",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test6",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test7",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test8",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0xFFFF),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test9",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 0xFFFF),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, 1),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test10",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 42),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, 24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_5, -8),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, 100, 6),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_5, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test11",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 42),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, 24),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_5, -8),
BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_6, -8),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_10, -8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, 100, 6),
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_5),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, 8),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_5, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
{
"meta access, test12",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_meta)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1,
offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 16),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_4, 5),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_2),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_5, 16),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_5, BPF_REG_3, 1),
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
};
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
static int probe_filter_length(const struct bpf_insn *fp)
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int len;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
for (len = MAX_INSNS - 1; len > 0; --len)
if (fp[len].code != 0 || fp[len].imm != 0)
break;
return len + 1;
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
static int create_map(uint32_t size_value, uint32_t max_elem)
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int fd;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: Use bpf_create_map() from the library Replace bpf_map_create() with bpf_create_map() calls. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:43 +00:00
fd = bpf_create_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH, sizeof(long long),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
size_value, max_elem, BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC);
if (fd < 0)
printf("Failed to create hash map '%s'!\n", strerror(errno));
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
return fd;
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
}
static int create_prog_array(void)
{
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int fd;
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: Use bpf_create_map() from the library Replace bpf_map_create() with bpf_create_map() calls. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Cc: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:43 +00:00
fd = bpf_create_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_PROG_ARRAY, sizeof(int),
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
sizeof(int), 4, 0);
if (fd < 0)
printf("Failed to create prog array '%s'!\n", strerror(errno));
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
return fd;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
}
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
static int create_map_in_map(void)
{
int inner_map_fd, outer_map_fd;
inner_map_fd = bpf_create_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY, sizeof(int),
sizeof(int), 1, 0);
if (inner_map_fd < 0) {
printf("Failed to create array '%s'!\n", strerror(errno));
return inner_map_fd;
}
outer_map_fd = bpf_create_map_in_map(BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY_OF_MAPS,
sizeof(int), inner_map_fd, 1, 0);
if (outer_map_fd < 0)
printf("Failed to create array of maps '%s'!\n",
strerror(errno));
close(inner_map_fd);
return outer_map_fd;
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
static char bpf_vlog[32768];
static void do_test_fixup(struct bpf_test *test, struct bpf_insn *prog,
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
int *map_fds)
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int *fixup_map1 = test->fixup_map1;
int *fixup_map2 = test->fixup_map2;
int *fixup_prog = test->fixup_prog;
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
int *fixup_map_in_map = test->fixup_map_in_map;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
/* Allocating HTs with 1 elem is fine here, since we only test
* for verifier and not do a runtime lookup, so the only thing
* that really matters is value size in this case.
*/
if (*fixup_map1) {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
map_fds[0] = create_map(sizeof(long long), 1);
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
do {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
prog[*fixup_map1].imm = map_fds[0];
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
fixup_map1++;
} while (*fixup_map1);
}
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
if (*fixup_map2) {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
map_fds[1] = create_map(sizeof(struct test_val), 1);
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
do {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
prog[*fixup_map2].imm = map_fds[1];
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
fixup_map2++;
} while (*fixup_map2);
}
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
if (*fixup_prog) {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
map_fds[2] = create_prog_array();
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
do {
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
prog[*fixup_prog].imm = map_fds[2];
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
fixup_prog++;
} while (*fixup_prog);
}
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
if (*fixup_map_in_map) {
map_fds[3] = create_map_in_map();
do {
prog[*fixup_map_in_map].imm = map_fds[3];
fixup_map_in_map++;
} while (*fixup_map_in_map);
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
}
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
int *passes, int *errors)
{
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
int fd_prog, expected_ret, reject_from_alignment;
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
struct bpf_insn *prog = test->insns;
int prog_len = probe_filter_length(prog);
int prog_type = test->prog_type;
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
int map_fds[MAX_NR_MAPS];
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
const char *expected_err;
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
int i;
for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)
map_fds[i] = -1;
bpf: allow access into map value arrays Suppose you have a map array value that is something like this struct foo { unsigned iter; int array[SOME_CONSTANT]; }; You can easily insert this into an array, but you cannot modify the contents of foo->array[] after the fact. This is because we have no way to verify we won't go off the end of the array at verification time. This patch provides a start for this work. We accomplish this by keeping track of a minimum and maximum value a register could be while we're checking the code. Then at the time we try to do an access into a MAP_VALUE we verify that the maximum offset into that region is a valid access into that memory region. So in practice, code such as this unsigned index = 0; if (foo->iter >= SOME_CONSTANT) foo->iter = index; else index = foo->iter++; foo->array[index] = bar; would be allowed, as we can verify that index will always be between 0 and SOME_CONSTANT-1. If you wish to use signed values you'll have to have an extra check to make sure the index isn't less than 0, or do something like index %= SOME_CONSTANT. Signed-off-by: Josef Bacik <jbacik@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-09-28 14:54:32 +00:00
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
do_test_fixup(test, prog, map_fds);
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add various verifier test cases This patch adds various verifier test cases: 1) A test case for the pruning issue when tracking alignment is used. 2) Various PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE_OR_NULL tests to make sure pointer arithmetic turns such register into UNKNOWN_VALUE type. 3) Test cases for the special treatment of LD_ABS/LD_IND to make sure verifier doesn't break calling convention here. Latter is needed, since f.e. arm64 JIT uses r1 - r5 for storing temporary data, so they really must be marked as NOT_INIT. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-05-24 23:05:09 +00:00
fd_prog = bpf_verify_program(prog_type ? : BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER,
prog, prog_len, test->flags & F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
bpf: allow to specify log level and reduce it for test_verifier For the test_verifier case, it's quite hard to parse log level 2 to figure out what's causing an issue when used to log level 1. We do want to use bpf_verify_program() in order to simulate some of the tests with strict alignment. So just add an argument to pass the level and put it to 1 for test_verifier. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-07-20 22:00:22 +00:00
"GPL", 0, bpf_vlog, sizeof(bpf_vlog), 1);
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
expected_ret = unpriv && test->result_unpriv != UNDEF ?
test->result_unpriv : test->result;
expected_err = unpriv && test->errstr_unpriv ?
test->errstr_unpriv : test->errstr;
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
reject_from_alignment = fd_prog < 0 &&
(test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) &&
strstr(bpf_vlog, "Unknown alignment.");
#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
if (reject_from_alignment) {
printf("FAIL\nFailed due to alignment despite having efficient unaligned access: '%s'!\n",
strerror(errno));
goto fail_log;
}
#endif
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
if (expected_ret == ACCEPT) {
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
if (fd_prog < 0 && !reject_from_alignment) {
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
printf("FAIL\nFailed to load prog '%s'!\n",
strerror(errno));
goto fail_log;
}
} else {
if (fd_prog >= 0) {
printf("FAIL\nUnexpected success to load!\n");
goto fail_log;
}
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
if (!strstr(bpf_vlog, expected_err) && !reject_from_alignment) {
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
printf("FAIL\nUnexpected error message!\n");
goto fail_log;
}
}
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
(*passes)++;
bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and need to mark affected tests accordingly. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-31 00:24:04 +00:00
printf("OK%s\n", reject_from_alignment ?
" (NOTE: reject due to unknown alignment)" : "");
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
close_fds:
close(fd_prog);
bpf: Add tests for map-in-map Test cases for array of maps and hash of maps. Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-22 17:00:35 +00:00
for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)
close(map_fds[i]);
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
sched_yield();
return;
fail_log:
(*errors)++;
printf("%s", bpf_vlog);
goto close_fds;
}
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
static bool is_admin(void)
{
cap_t caps;
cap_flag_value_t sysadmin = CAP_CLEAR;
const cap_value_t cap_val = CAP_SYS_ADMIN;
selftests/bpf: fix broken build Recent merge of 'linux-kselftest-4.11-rc1' tree broke bpf test build. None of the tests were building and test_verifier.c had tons of compiler errors. Fix it and add #ifdef CAP_IS_SUPPORTED to support old versions of libcap. Tested on centos 6.8 and 7 Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-11 06:05:55 +00:00
#ifdef CAP_IS_SUPPORTED
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
if (!CAP_IS_SUPPORTED(CAP_SETFCAP)) {
perror("cap_get_flag");
return false;
}
selftests/bpf: fix broken build Recent merge of 'linux-kselftest-4.11-rc1' tree broke bpf test build. None of the tests were building and test_verifier.c had tons of compiler errors. Fix it and add #ifdef CAP_IS_SUPPORTED to support old versions of libcap. Tested on centos 6.8 and 7 Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-03-11 06:05:55 +00:00
#endif
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
caps = cap_get_proc();
if (!caps) {
perror("cap_get_proc");
return false;
}
if (cap_get_flag(caps, cap_val, CAP_EFFECTIVE, &sysadmin))
perror("cap_get_flag");
if (cap_free(caps))
perror("cap_free");
return (sysadmin == CAP_SET);
}
static int set_admin(bool admin)
{
cap_t caps;
const cap_value_t cap_val = CAP_SYS_ADMIN;
int ret = -1;
caps = cap_get_proc();
if (!caps) {
perror("cap_get_proc");
return -1;
}
if (cap_set_flag(caps, CAP_EFFECTIVE, 1, &cap_val,
admin ? CAP_SET : CAP_CLEAR)) {
perror("cap_set_flag");
goto out;
}
if (cap_set_proc(caps)) {
perror("cap_set_proc");
goto out;
}
ret = 0;
out:
if (cap_free(caps))
perror("cap_free");
return ret;
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
static int do_test(bool unpriv, unsigned int from, unsigned int to)
{
int i, passes = 0, errors = 0;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
for (i = from; i < to; i++) {
struct bpf_test *test = &tests[i];
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
/* Program types that are not supported by non-root we
* skip right away.
*/
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
if (!test->prog_type) {
if (!unpriv)
set_admin(false);
printf("#%d/u %s ", i, test->descr);
do_test_single(test, true, &passes, &errors);
if (!unpriv)
set_admin(true);
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
if (!unpriv) {
printf("#%d/p %s ", i, test->descr);
do_test_single(test, false, &passes, &errors);
}
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
printf("Summary: %d PASSED, %d FAILED\n", passes, errors);
selftests/bpf: make correct use of exit codes in bpf selftests The selftests depend on using the shell exit code as a mean of detecting the success or failure of test-binary executed. The appropiate output "[PASS]" or "[FAIL]" in generated by tools/testing/selftests/lib.mk. Notice that the exit code is masked with 255. Thus, be careful if using the number of errors as the exit code, as 256 errors would be seen as a success. There are two standard defined exit(3) codes: /usr/include/stdlib.h #define EXIT_FAILURE 1 /* Failing exit status. */ #define EXIT_SUCCESS 0 /* Successful exit status. */ Fix test_verifier.c to not use the negative value of variable "results", but instead return EXIT_FAILURE. Fix test_align.c and test_progs.c to actually use exit codes, before they were always indicating success regardless of results. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Reviewed-by: Fengguang Wu <fengguang.wu@intel.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-06-13 13:17:19 +00:00
return errors ? EXIT_FAILURE : EXIT_SUCCESS;
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
}
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
int main(int argc, char **argv)
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
{
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
struct rlimit rinf = { RLIM_INFINITY, RLIM_INFINITY };
struct rlimit rlim = { 1 << 20, 1 << 20 };
unsigned int from = 0, to = ARRAY_SIZE(tests);
bpf: Always test unprivileged programs If selftests are run as root, then execute the unprivileged checks as well. This switch from 243 to 368 tests. The test numbers are suffixed with "/u" when executed as unprivileged or with "/p" when executed as privileged. The geteuid() check is replaced with a capability check. Handling capabilities requires the libcap dependency. Signed-off-by: Mickaël Salaün <mic@digikod.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2017-02-09 23:21:37 +00:00
bool unpriv = !is_admin();
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
if (argc == 3) {
unsigned int l = atoi(argv[argc - 2]);
unsigned int u = atoi(argv[argc - 1]);
if (l < to && u < to) {
from = l;
to = u + 1;
}
} else if (argc == 2) {
unsigned int t = atoi(argv[argc - 1]);
if (t < to) {
from = t;
to = t + 1;
}
}
bpf: add unprivileged bpf tests Add new tests samples/bpf/test_verifier: unpriv: return pointer checks that pointer cannot be returned from the eBPF program unpriv: add const to pointer unpriv: add pointer to pointer unpriv: neg pointer checks that pointer arithmetic is disallowed unpriv: cmp pointer with const unpriv: cmp pointer with pointer checks that comparison of pointers is disallowed Only one case allowed 'void *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(..); if (value == 0) ...' unpriv: check that printk is disallowed since bpf_trace_printk is not available to unprivileged unpriv: pass pointer to helper function checks that pointers cannot be passed to functions that expect integers If function expects a pointer the verifier allows only that type of pointer. Like 1st argument of bpf_map_lookup_elem() must be pointer to map. (applies to non-root as well) unpriv: indirectly pass pointer on stack to helper function checks that pointer stored into stack cannot be used as part of key passed into bpf_map_lookup_elem() unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 1 unpriv: mangle pointer on stack 2 checks that writing into stack slot that already contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: read pointer from stack in small chunks checks that < 8 byte read from stack slot that contains a pointer is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into ctx checks that storing pointers into skb->fields is disallowed unpriv: write pointer into map elem value checks that storing pointers into element values is disallowed For example: int bpf_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb) { u32 key = 0; u64 *value = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &key); if (value) *value = (u64) skb; } will be rejected. unpriv: partial copy of pointer checks that doing 32-bit register mov from register containing a pointer is disallowed unpriv: pass pointer to tail_call checks that passing pointer as an index into bpf_tail_call is disallowed unpriv: cmp map pointer with zero checks that comparing map pointer with constant is disallowed unpriv: write into frame pointer checks that frame pointer is read-only (applies to root too) unpriv: cmp of frame pointer checks that R10 cannot be using in comparison unpriv: cmp of stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but comparing Rx is not unpriv: obfuscate stack pointer checks that Rx = R10 - imm is ok, but Rx -= imm is not Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2015-10-08 05:23:23 +00:00
bpf: add initial suite for selftests Add a start of a test suite for kernel selftests. This moves test_verifier and test_maps over to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ along with various code improvements and also adds a script for invoking test_bpf module. The test suite can simply be run via selftest framework, f.e.: # cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf/ # make # make run_tests Both test_verifier and test_maps were kind of misplaced in samples/bpf/ directory and we were looking into adding them to selftests for a while now, so it can be picked up by kbuild bot et al and hopefully also get more exposure and thus new test case additions. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2016-10-17 12:28:36 +00:00
setrlimit(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, unpriv ? &rlim : &rinf);
return do_test(unpriv, from, to);
bpf: mini eBPF library, test stubs and verifier testsuite 1. the library includes a trivial set of BPF syscall wrappers: int bpf_create_map(int key_size, int value_size, int max_entries); int bpf_update_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_lookup_elem(int fd, void *key, void *value); int bpf_delete_elem(int fd, void *key); int bpf_get_next_key(int fd, void *key, void *next_key); int bpf_prog_load(enum bpf_prog_type prog_type, const struct sock_filter_int *insns, int insn_len, const char *license); bpf_prog_load() stores verifier log into global bpf_log_buf[] array and BPF_*() macros to build instructions 2. test stubs configure eBPF infra with 'unspec' map and program types. These are fake types used by user space testsuite only. 3. verifier tests valid and invalid programs and expects predefined error log messages from kernel. 40 tests so far. $ sudo ./test_verifier #0 add+sub+mul OK #1 unreachable OK #2 unreachable2 OK #3 out of range jump OK #4 out of range jump2 OK #5 test1 ld_imm64 OK ... Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2014-09-26 07:17:07 +00:00
}
Reference in New Issue Copy Permalink