From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S933984AbdKBP7y (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 2 Nov 2017 11:59:54 -0400
Received: from mail-pg0-f65.google.com ([74.125.83.65]:44054 "EHLO
        mail-pg0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932280AbdKBP7w (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 2 Nov 2017 11:59:52 -0400
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABhQp+RtGBxFzwWtf/icSgr6yDJaGyWnivZvz3X9j7QiNp1iSVjyPZvSWCe11stapUYj+XeEsbEEKg==
Date: Thu, 2 Nov 2017 08:59:47 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] [net-next] bpf: fix out-of-bounds access warning in
 bpf_check
Message-ID: <20171102155945.vvrrugvhrgdvvkso@ast-mbp>
References: <20171102110558.2746221-1-arnd@arndb.de>
 <20171102110558.2746221-2-arnd@arndb.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20171102110558.2746221-2-arnd@arndb.de>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170421 (1.8.2)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 12:05:52PM +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> The bpf_verifer_ops array is generated dynamically and may be
> empty depending on configuration, which then causes an out
> of bounds access:
> 
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c: In function 'bpf_check':
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c:4320:29: error: array subscript is above array bounds [-Werror=array-bounds]
> 
> This adds a check to the start of the function as a workaround.
> I would assume that the function is never called in that configuration,
> so the warning is probably harmless.
> 
> Fixes: 00176a34d9e2 ("bpf: remove the verifier ops from program structure")
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> ---
> Since there hasn't been a linux-next release in two weeks, I'm not
> entirely sure this is still needed, but from looking of the net-next
> contents it seems it is. I did not check any other trees that might
> have a fix already.
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 ++++
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 750aff880ecb..debb60ad08ee 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -4447,6 +4447,10 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr)
>  	struct bpf_verifer_log *log;
>  	int ret = -EINVAL;
>  
> +	/* no program is valid */
> +	if (ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_verifier_ops) == 0)
> +		return -EINVAL;

sorry I don't see how bpf_verifier_ops can be empty.
Did you mix it up with your previous patch when you made bpf_analyzer_ops empty?