From: Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta@linux.dev>
To: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com
Cc: martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
jolsa@kernel.org, emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, shuah@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta@linux.dev>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/12] selftests/bpf: Cover sign extensions that cannot change the range
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2026 09:18:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261020161907.2115379-3-vineet.gupta@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261020161907.2115379-1-vineet.gupta@linux.dev>
Two programs, one per field width that coerce_subreg_to_size_sx() handles.
Each builds a 32-bit range that straddles zero but still fits the target
field, so the sign extension is a no-op: [-63, 0] for (s8) and [-4095, 0]
for (s16). The guard that follows can only be resolved statically if the
range survives, and it protects a div by zero, so a widened range is a
verification failure rather than a silently weaker test.
Signed-off-by: Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta@linux.dev>
---
v3: was v2 6/13.
- moved with patch 1, and narrowed to the 32-bit mov to match it. The
ALU64 forms v2 tested now pass with or without the patch.
.../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_movsx.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 55 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_movsx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_movsx.c
index 195b27a51224..3fcd03b7a547 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_movsx.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_movsx.c
@@ -202,6 +202,61 @@ l0_%=: \
: __clobber_all);
}
+/*
+ * A 32-bit range that already fits the field is unchanged by the sign
+ * extension. Both of these straddle zero, so reg_umax() is huge and the high
+ * bits of s32_min and s32_max differ: neither of the gates that predate
+ * testing the range against the field can keep it. The guard that follows can
+ * only be resolved statically if the range survives, and it protects a div by
+ * zero, so a widened range is a verification failure rather than a silently
+ * weaker test.
+ */
+SEC("socket")
+__description("MOV32SX, S8, negative range is preserved")
+__success __success_unpriv __retval(0)
+__naked void mov32sx_s8_negative_range(void)
+{
+ asm volatile (" \
+ call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32]; \
+ w0 &= 0x3f; \
+ w0 -= 0x3f; \
+ /* w0 is [-63, 0], already a valid s8 */ \
+ w0 = (s8)w0; \
+ if w0 s< -0x3f goto l0_%=; \
+ w0 = 0; \
+ exit; \
+l0_%=: \
+ /* unreachable unless the range was widened */ \
+ w0 /= 0; \
+ exit; \
+" :
+ : __imm(bpf_get_prandom_u32)
+ : __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("socket")
+__description("MOV32SX, S16, negative range is preserved")
+__success __success_unpriv __retval(0)
+__naked void mov32sx_s16_negative_range(void)
+{
+ asm volatile (" \
+ call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32]; \
+ w0 &= 0xfff; \
+ w0 -= 0xfff; \
+ /* w0 is [-4095, 0], already a valid s16 */ \
+ w0 = (s16)w0; \
+ if w0 s< -0xfff goto l0_%=; \
+ w0 = 0; \
+ exit; \
+l0_%=: \
+ /* unreachable unless the range was widened */ \
+ w0 /= 0; \
+ exit; \
+" :
+ : __imm(bpf_get_prandom_u32)
+ : __clobber_all);
+}
+
SEC("socket")
__description("MOV64SX, S16, R10 Sign Extension")
__failure __msg("R1 type=scalar expected=fp, pkt, pkt_meta, map_key, map_value, mem, ringbuf_mem, buf, trusted_ptr_")
--
2.53.0-Meta
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-20 16:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-20 16:18 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/12] bpf: track scalar equality across the low 32 bits Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:18 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/12] bpf: Keep the 32-bit range across a sign extension that cannot change it Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:18 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2026-10-20 16:18 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/12] bpf: Prepare linked scalars for relations narrower than 64 bits Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 17:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-20 16:18 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/12] bpf: Track low-32 scalar equality across zero-extending movs Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 17:09 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/12] selftests/bpf: Cover the low-32 link for " Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:53 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/12] bpf: Track low-32 scalar equality across sign-extending movs Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/12] selftests/bpf: Cover the low-32 link for " Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/12] bpf: Recover the low 32 bits on the reverse link direction Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:53 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/12] bpf: Track low-32 scalar equality across narrowing stack fills Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/12] selftests/bpf: Cover the low-32 link for " Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:52 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/12] [do not merge] bpf: Track low-32 scalar equality across narrowing stack spills Vineet Gupta
2026-10-20 16:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/12] [do not merge] selftests/bpf: Cover the low-32 link for " Vineet Gupta
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=20261020161907.2115379-3-vineet.gupta@linux.dev \
--to=vineet.gupta@linux.dev \
--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=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@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®