mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Artem Dinaburg <artem@trailofbits.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, eddyz87@gmail.com, emil@etsalapatis.com,
	ihor.solodrai@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	martin.lau@linux.dev, memxor@gmail.com, olsajiri@gmail.com,
	paul.chaignon@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
	yonghong.song@linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH 6.6.y] bpf: Check the helper function is valid in get_helper_proto
Date: Thu, 15 Oct 2026 22:22:03 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261016022203.17034-1-artem@trailofbits.com> (raw)

From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>

[ Upstream commit e4414b01c1cd9887bbde92f946c1ba94e40d6d64 ]

kernel test robot reported verifier bug [1] where the helper func
pointer could be NULL due to disabled config option.

As Alexei suggested we could check on that in get_helper_proto
directly. Marking tail_call helper func with BPF_PTR_POISON,
because it is unused by design.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202507160818.68358831-lkp@intel.com

Reported-by: kernel test robot <oliver.sang@intel.com>
Reported-by: syzbot+a9ed3d9132939852d0df@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Paul Chaignon <paul.chaignon@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250814200655.945632-1-jolsa@kernel.org
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/oe-lkp/202507160818.68358831-lkp@intel.com
Assisted-by: LLM
[ Backport to 6.6.y: Apply the function-pointer validity check in
  check_helper_call(), because this target has no get_helper_proto().
  Refer to the target get_func_proto() callback in the tail-call comment.
  ]
Signed-off-by: Artem Dinaburg <artem@trailofbits.com>
---
Hi,

Please consider this backport of the fix for CVE-2025-39990 to 6.6.y.

The helper-validity check is applied in check_helper_call() and its
comment names the target get_func_proto() callback. See the bracketed
backport note above.

The complete fix is already present in 6.12.y, 6.18.y and 7.2.y.

Build-tested only as part of a cumulative 6.6.y series on x86_64
(allmodconfig, CONFIG_WERROR=y); no runtime testing.

Thanks,
Artem Dinaburg

 kernel/bpf/core.c     |    5 ++++-
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c |    2 +-
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 9fa984ee076bccbf5e90eb6a194cec68f2351200..bec8876f12375bbbe00d8cbe5ee7d410e48ecd88 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -2959,7 +2959,10 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(bpf_event_output);
 
 /* Always built-in helper functions. */
 const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_tail_call_proto = {
-	.func		= NULL,
+	/* func is unused for tail_call, we set it to pass the
+	 * get_func_proto check
+	 */
+	.func		= BPF_PTR_POISON,
 	.gpl_only	= false,
 	.ret_type	= RET_VOID,
 	.arg1_type	= ARG_PTR_TO_CTX,
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 778a68bfb91dd4e765252cfb1bacb4b658d1381b..a72e1561464cb94942afa723e57c76f032d30dc0 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -10091,7 +10091,7 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
 
 	if (env->ops->get_func_proto)
 		fn = env->ops->get_func_proto(func_id, env->prog);
-	if (!fn) {
+	if (!fn || !fn->func) {
 		verbose(env, "unknown func %s#%d\n", func_id_name(func_id),
 			func_id);
 		return -EINVAL;

                 reply	other threads:[~2026-10-16  2:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20261016022203.17034-1-artem@trailofbits.com \
    --to=artem@trailofbits.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=olsajiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=paul.chaignon@gmail.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®