-
Alexei Starovoitov authored
The problem can be seen in the following two tests: 0: (bf) r3 = r10 1: (55) if r3 != 0x7b goto pc+0 2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r3 -8) = 0 3: (79) r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8) .. 0: (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7 1: (bf) r3 = r10 2: (55) if r3 != 0x7b goto pc+0 3: (7b) *(u64 *)(r3 -8) = r0 4: (79) r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8) When backtracking need to mark R4 it will mark slot fp-8. But ST or STX into fp-8 could belong to the same block of instructions. When backtracing is done the parent state may have fp-8 slot as "unallocated stack". Which will cause verifier to warn and incorrectly reject such programs. Writes into stack via non-R10 register are rare. llvm always generates canonical stack spill/fill. For such pathological case fall back to conservative precision tracking instead of rejecting. Reported-by: syzbot+c8d66267fd2b5955287e@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Fixes: b5dc0163 ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking") Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2339cd6c