lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] bpf: Attachment verification for BPF_MODIFY_RETURN
On Wed, Mar 04, 2020 at 12:21:51AM +0100, KP Singh wrote:
>
> > > + t = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, t->type, NULL);
> > > + if (!btf_type_is_int(t)) {
> >
> > Should the size of int be verified here? E.g., if some function
> > returns u8, is that ok for BPF program to return, say, (1<<30) ?
>
> Would this work?
>
> if (size != t->size) {
> bpf_log(log,
> "size accessed = %d should be %d\n",
> size, t->size);
> return false;
> }

It will cause spurious failures later when llvm optimizes
if (ret & 0xff) into u8 load.
I think btf_type_is_int() is enough as-is.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-04 01:04    [W:0.155 / U:0.180 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site