Skip to content

libbpf: Add additional null-pointer checking in make_parent_dir #344

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

kernel-patches-bot
Copy link

Pull request for series with
subject: libbpf: Add additional null-pointer checking in make_parent_dir
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 0ed6ff5
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164
version: 1

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 9d87e41
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164
version: 1

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 920fd5e
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164
version: 1

Kernel Patches Daemon and others added 2 commits April 21, 2022 09:55
The make_parent_dir is called without null-pointer checking for path,
such as bpf_link__pin. To ensure there is no null-pointer dereference
in make_parent_dir, so make_parent_dir requires additional null-pointer
checking for path.

Signed-off-by: Gaosheng Cui <[email protected]>
@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 6a12b8e
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164
version: 1

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=634164 irrelevant now. Closing PR.

@kernel-patches-bot kernel-patches-bot deleted the series/634164=>bpf-next branch April 21, 2022 17:02
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2024
Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module
exhibits the following failures:

	test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 301 PASS
	test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 555 PASS
	test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 268 PASS
	test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 269 PASS
	test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 460 PASS
	test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 320 PASS
	test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 222 PASS
	test_bpf: #320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 273 PASS

	test_bpf: #344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B
	eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 432 PASS
	test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H
	eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 381 PASS
	test_bpf: #346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
	eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 505 PASS

	test_bpf: #490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1
	eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported
	jited:0 261 PASS

	test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed]

Fix them by adding missing processing.

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the
miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc.

  # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [...]
  ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [    3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
  [    3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel
  #332     tc_links_after:OK
  #333     tc_links_append:OK
  #334     tc_links_basic:OK
  #335     tc_links_before:OK
  #336     tc_links_chain_classic:OK
  #337     tc_links_chain_mixed:OK
  #338     tc_links_dev_chain0:OK
  #339     tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK
  #340     tc_links_dev_mixed:OK
  #341     tc_links_ingress:OK
  #342     tc_links_invalid:OK
  #343     tc_links_prepend:OK
  #344     tc_links_replace:OK
  #345     tc_links_revision:OK
  Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the
miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc.

  # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [...]
  ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [    3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
  [    3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel
  #332     tc_links_after:OK
  #333     tc_links_append:OK
  #334     tc_links_basic:OK
  #335     tc_links_before:OK
  #336     tc_links_chain_classic:OK
  #337     tc_links_chain_mixed:OK
  #338     tc_links_dev_chain0:OK
  #339     tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK
  #340     tc_links_dev_mixed:OK
  #341     tc_links_ingress:OK
  #342     tc_links_invalid:OK
  #343     tc_links_prepend:OK
  #344     tc_links_replace:OK
  #345     tc_links_revision:OK
  Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the
miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc.

  # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [...]
  ./test_progs -t tc_link
  [    3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
  [    3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel
  #332     tc_links_after:OK
  #333     tc_links_append:OK
  #334     tc_links_basic:OK
  #335     tc_links_before:OK
  #336     tc_links_chain_classic:OK
  #337     tc_links_chain_mixed:OK
  #338     tc_links_dev_chain0:OK
  #339     tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK
  #340     tc_links_dev_mixed:OK
  #341     tc_links_ingress:OK
  #342     tc_links_invalid:OK
  #343     tc_links_prepend:OK
  #344     tc_links_replace:OK
  #345     tc_links_revision:OK
  Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants