[PATCH 31/33] bpf: Add __bpf_prog_run() to stacktool whitelist

[Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>]

stacktool reports the following false positive warnings:

  stacktool: kernel/bpf/core.o: __bpf_prog_run()+0x5c: sibling call from callable instruction with changed frame pointer
  stacktool: kernel/bpf/core.o: __bpf_prog_run()+0x60: function has unreachable instruction
  stacktool: kernel/bpf/core.o: __bpf_prog_run()+0x64: function has unreachable instruction
  [...]

It's confused by the following dynamic jump instruction in
__bpf_prog_run()::

  jmp     *(%r12,%rax,8)

which corresponds to the following line in the C code:

  goto *jumptable[insn->code];

There's no way for stacktool to deterministically find all possible
branch targets for a dynamic jump, so it can't verify this code.

In this case the jumps all stay within the function, and there's nothing
unusual going on related to the stack, so we can whitelist the function.

Signed-off-by: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
---
 kernel/bpf/core.c | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 972d9a8..7108a96 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -27,6 +27,7 @@
 #include <linux/random.h>
 #include <linux/moduleloader.h>
 #include <linux/bpf.h>
+#include <linux/stacktool.h>
 
 #include <asm/unaligned.h>
 
@@ -649,6 +650,7 @@ load_byte:
 		WARN_RATELIMIT(1, "unknown opcode %02x\n", insn->code);
 		return 0;
 }
+STACKTOOL_IGNORE_FUNC(__bpf_prog_run);
 
 bool bpf_prog_array_compatible(struct bpf_array *array,
 			       const struct bpf_prog *fp)
-- 
2.4.3