Recently during testing, I ran into the following panic:
[ 207.892422] Internal error: Accessing user space memory outside uaccess.h routines: 96000004 [#1] SMP
[ 207.901637] Modules linked in: binfmt_misc [...]
[ 207.966530] CPU: 45 PID: 2256 Comm: test_verifier Tainted: G W 4.17.0-rc3+ #7
[ 207.974956] Hardware name: FOXCONN R2-1221R-A4/C2U4N_MB, BIOS G31FB18A 03/31/2017
[ 207.982428] pstate: 60400005 (nZCv daif +PAN -UAO)
[ 207.987214] pc : bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x34/0xc0
[ 207.992603] lr : 0xffff000000bdb754
[ 207.996080] sp : ffff000013703ca0
[ 207.999384] x29: ffff000013703ca0 x28: 0000000000000001
[ 208.004688] x27: 0000000000000001 x26: 0000000000000000
[ 208.009992] x25: ffff000013703ce0 x24: ffff800fb4afcb00
[ 208.015295] x23: ffff00007d2f5038 x22: ffff00007d2f5000
[ 208.020599] x21: fffffffffeff2a6f x20: 000000000000000a
[ 208.025903] x19: ffff000009578000 x18: 0000000000000a03
[ 208.031206] x17: 0000000000000000 x16: 0000000000000000
[ 208.036510] x15: 0000ffff9de83000 x14: 0000000000000000
[ 208.041813] x13: 0000000000000000 x12: 0000000000000000
[ 208.047116] x11: 0000000000000001 x10: ffff0000089e7f18
[ 208.052419] x9 : fffffffffeff2a6f x8 : 0000000000000000
[ 208.057723] x7 : 000000000000000a x6 : 00280c6160000000
[ 208.063026] x5 : 0000000000000018 x4 : 0000000000007db6
[ 208.068329] x3 : 000000000008647a x2 : 19868179b1484500
[ 208.073632] x1 : 0000000000000000 x0 : ffff000009578c08
[ 208.078938] Process test_verifier (pid: 2256, stack limit = 0x0000000049ca7974)
[ 208.086235] Call trace:
[ 208.088672] bpf_skb_load_helper_8_no_cache+0x34/0xc0
[ 208.093713] 0xffff000000bdb754
[ 208.096845] bpf_test_run+0x78/0xf8
[ 208.100324] bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x148/0x230
[ 208.104758] sys_bpf+0x314/0x1198
[ 208.108064] el0_svc_naked+0x30/0x34
[ 208.111632] Code: 91302260 f9400001 f9001fa1 d2800001 (29500680)
[ 208.117717] ---[ end trace 263cb8a59b5bf29f ]---
The program itself which caused this had a long jump over the whole
instruction sequence where all of the inner instructions required
heavy expansions into multiple BPF instructions. Additionally, I also
had BPF hardening enabled which requires once more rewrites of all
constant values in order to blind them. Each time we rewrite insns,
bpf_adj_branches() would need to potentially adjust branch targets
which cross the patchlet boundary to accommodate for the additional
delta. Eventually that lead to the case where the target offset could
not fit into insn->off's upper 0x7fff limit anymore where then offset
wraps around becoming negative (in s16 universe), or vice versa
depending on the jump direction.
Therefore it becomes necessary to detect and reject any such occasions
in a generic way for native eBPF and cBPF to eBPF migrations. For
the latter we can simply check bounds in the bpf_convert_filter()'s
BPF_EMIT_JMP helper macro and bail out once we surpass limits. The
bpf_patch_insn_single() for native eBPF (and cBPF to eBPF in case
of subsequent hardening) is a bit more complex in that we need to
detect such truncations before hitting the bpf_prog_realloc(). Thus
the latter is split into an extra pass to probe problematic offsets
on the original program in order to fail early. With that in place
and carefully tested I no longer hit the panic and the rewrites are
rejected properly. The above example panic I've seen on bpf-next,
though the issue itself is generic in that a guard against this issue
in bpf seems more appropriate in this case.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
050fad7c45