Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: check null propagation only neither reg is PTR_TO_BTF_ID

From: Martin KaFai Lau
Date: Wed Dec 21 2022 - 16:21:41 EST


On 12/21/22 5:46 AM, Hao Sun wrote:
Hi,

I’ve tried something like the bellow, but soon realized that this
won’t work because once compiler figures out `inner_map` equals
to `val`, it can choose either reg to write into in the following
path, meaning that this program can be rejected due to writing
into read-only PTR_TO_BTF_ID reg, and this makes the test useless.

hmm... I read the above a few times but I still don't quite get it. In particular, '...can be rejected due to writing into read-only PTR_TO_BTF_ID reg...'. Where is it writing into a read-only PTR_TO_BTF_ID reg in the following bpf prog? Did I overlook something?


Essentially, we want two regs, one points to PTR_TO_BTD_ID, one
points to MAP_VALUR_OR_NULL, then compare them and deref map val.

If I read this request correctly, I guess the compiler has changed 'ret = *val' to 'ret = *inner_map'? Thus, the verifier did not reject because it deref a PTR_TO_BTF_ID?

It’s hard to implement this in C level because compilers decide
which reg to use but not us, maybe we can just drop this test.

Have you tried inline assembly. Something like this (untested):

asm volatile (
"r8 = %[val];\n"
"r9 = %[inner_map];\n"
"if r8 != r9 goto +1;\n"
"%[ret] = *(u64 *)(r8 +0);\n"
:[ret] "+r"(ret)
: [inner_map] "r"(inner_map), [val] "r"(val)
:"r8", "r9");

Please attach the verifier output in the future. It will be easier to understand.


thoughts?
+struct {
+ __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH);
+ __uint(max_entries, 1);
+ __type(key, u64);
+ __type(value, u64);
+} m_hash SEC(".maps");
+
+SEC("?raw_tp")
+__failure __msg("invalid mem access 'map_value_or_null")
+int jeq_infer_not_null_ptr_to_btfid(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct bpf_map *map = (struct bpf_map *)&m_hash;
+ struct bpf_map *inner_map = map->inner_map_meta;
+ u64 key = 0, ret = 0, *val;
+
+ val = bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, &key);
+ /* Do not mark ptr as non-null if one of them is
+ * PTR_TO_BTF_ID, reject because of invalid access
+ * to map value.
+ */
+ if (val == inner_map)
+ ret = *val;
+
+ return ret;
+}