From: Daniel Borkmann Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 23:24:24 +0000 (+0100) Subject: bpf: Fix signed_{sub,add32}_overflows type handling X-Git-Tag: v5.15~1953^2~5^2 X-Git-Url: http://review.tizen.org/git/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=bc895e8b2a64e502fbba72748d59618272052a8b;p=platform%2Fkernel%2Flinux-starfive.git bpf: Fix signed_{sub,add32}_overflows type handling Fix incorrect signed_{sub,add32}_overflows() input types (and a related buggy comment). It looks like this might have slipped in via copy/paste issue, also given prior to 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking") the signature of signed_sub_overflows() had s64 a and s64 b as its input args whereas now they are truncated to s32. Thus restore proper types. Also, the case of signed_add32_overflows() is not consistent to signed_sub32_overflows(). Both have s32 as inputs, therefore align the former. Fixes: 3f50f132d840 ("bpf: Verifier, do explicit ALU32 bounds tracking") Reported-by: De4dCr0w Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov --- diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 36af69f..e7368c5 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -5313,7 +5313,7 @@ static bool signed_add_overflows(s64 a, s64 b) return res < a; } -static bool signed_add32_overflows(s64 a, s64 b) +static bool signed_add32_overflows(s32 a, s32 b) { /* Do the add in u32, where overflow is well-defined */ s32 res = (s32)((u32)a + (u32)b); @@ -5323,7 +5323,7 @@ static bool signed_add32_overflows(s64 a, s64 b) return res < a; } -static bool signed_sub_overflows(s32 a, s32 b) +static bool signed_sub_overflows(s64 a, s64 b) { /* Do the sub in u64, where overflow is well-defined */ s64 res = (s64)((u64)a - (u64)b); @@ -5335,7 +5335,7 @@ static bool signed_sub_overflows(s32 a, s32 b) static bool signed_sub32_overflows(s32 a, s32 b) { - /* Do the sub in u64, where overflow is well-defined */ + /* Do the sub in u32, where overflow is well-defined */ s32 res = (s32)((u32)a - (u32)b); if (b < 0)