Received: by 2002:a05:6358:d09b:b0:dc:cd0c:909e with SMTP id jc27csp1245556rwb; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 15:08:31 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4xjFRihzxSnqSQGar27KJYJnEzByQO+t+fhUgeXtI0/nYvXvJNwkklPyvLtHW38gHqHswC X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d341:0:b0:464:778:c3fe with SMTP id m1-20020aa7d341000000b004640778c3femr40887641edr.251.1668035311296; Wed, 09 Nov 2022 15:08:31 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1668035311; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=yfvyOXKBAQDWeBqiMWWJLecmlBMwX/HxZrnULPtjGqArs1/2G6+lKZMyJAxAoOkq+j XAafoAgx3fi2jNP+5ghHg8ImflMXzE5pWLOa+llw+xPQTVdmRubgrZtPVwMMT7ACIe59 dOfqwDGWhhBN2RUTPSoPd/yjskjC5lwhm2Qx5X+OGK4x4nq6PkFCbN8TNtLKiAPec6T2 Jo5lUEepAL4CoZbwjoBszQfCXZ78U5QWL0S20EgeRkSYUJ0nk9wJ6wfTp3YfH2ZMxawM pKt1duZLeH8mFo/zcoUVgg5r0g6hUPBgDUPcON9rajAQWpVXod7Oxu2tmevqr+pWralv eOxw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:dkim-signature; bh=GdAEt6KovCYY+VvwhAcPGME29rPsv1BM1egHu99tC4E=; b=zxlS+VZ6GwP1CdljlKFzRXO48+ddqRE3lHiy9ntKX+zuvd3Gjea+m/8MR0FML2CdLu 4rcym1WZwLUzOuqzDJcyfxfCRFhTRFcgTyiB77mXS2zjYuRxVFsw0vmRzrMAoNth8IzK Y4bO+sVd8pfjm0HIajI9w0mG281N9RsDPpiYxVP2IMJZHj7kU7KTHlzpPT4oN7ZGm9tk nuJ1+lgPndy2H8aEaUzxifz9fs3R3NSCR6EKO3ypSJL361J2beVQ3KurQbif6AyPCVHb kEGl75WlmZzzVb2l+ZA/BbwWVG+XYHa2xXwUXO0n4/KUUc/+Ugt5UUHEKxitRvrqRGuZ 6hqg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=M4PTdhbQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id v14-20020a1709064e8e00b0078dce2b1985si12565848eju.134.2022.11.09.15.08.08; Wed, 09 Nov 2022 15:08:31 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@google.com header.s=20210112 header.b=M4PTdhbQ; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=REJECT sp=REJECT dis=NONE) header.from=google.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231787AbiKIVn7 (ORCPT + 92 others); Wed, 9 Nov 2022 16:43:59 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47276 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229848AbiKIVn5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Nov 2022 16:43:57 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-x132.google.com (mail-il1-x132.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::132]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D02492F3AB for ; Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:43:55 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-il1-x132.google.com with SMTP id o13so120714ilc.7 for ; Wed, 09 Nov 2022 13:43:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=GdAEt6KovCYY+VvwhAcPGME29rPsv1BM1egHu99tC4E=; b=M4PTdhbQF4bi7mDtdJB7anN/q4vZnWpIgn8KNPow05g+e61MUxe5+FYiqjZMOS3YPP YRf0rtHeDwn2hFASRGvgX9ZsA0imP0pb38atmWGRcRG6oDn3bvKY+eqIYxp3hxkcTG7F EP2hY3Uq3eK3U+utycRQnRdy1hQRHyracn0yJS8ZzBVrkmYxtZfxkRGtdq0J687JzBYi YoRq7xh1G+mKJKzmp3zgZ76nRNbfgjCrLUIgwTMumK+PTwyFEG9uMMjRA/5F/yJ7SLRz gkZ4dq03FemWF3zGy9KDV/SORdDb4OX4TuDNZV4jY17M9suUw3/RpL0k58OqaybfpCJS uTdw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=GdAEt6KovCYY+VvwhAcPGME29rPsv1BM1egHu99tC4E=; b=iCrF1MHbrqBlMXyiMuA6o+GGwLodM4xAwDOS91YshC7HAgUsVNVx09MewRgTHXp2F1 UGmedLJg5qybV5Lo4GTOwHk8ORE4RyJwoRRcSY7oVC+HQoxt9QxvwBTaBoGsRI6zzvMU 0F2E9Y+JgUUJBcSNzXlv0RXFMWq0QicVAjJ2t/OB07mFiAHsBURJkw9OvPcLTsFRgJ7M PamwITtJoJeesA/A/C0n2tUfXzi2/nSUsh2Er8575FTm0pC4gggvPCRiA91UnBB8Zm2V rfj4wojiihFlAzzdGybpz7QiJxf/AvUKzUrcTT+KNJ33W711xZPijNDQYs7PJStWKsie zwyg== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf2CNDJlEq+kyjkFBMUqw4wwAI7dmRGaRYd5rsvEDDWd/AaGSXgW /SZx1lXLbcB5FsBXH4C972Ggp624lV6tXu2ZYKiuFQ== X-Received: by 2002:a92:d74f:0:b0:300:ad95:35c5 with SMTP id e15-20020a92d74f000000b00300ad9535c5mr31019963ilq.137.1668030235042; Wed, 09 Nov 2022 13:43:55 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20220715115559.139691-1-shaozhengchao@huawei.com> <0e69cc92-fece-3673-f7f8-24f5397183b3@linux.dev> In-Reply-To: From: Stanislav Fomichev Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2022 13:43:44 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4,bpf-next] bpf: Don't redirect packets with invalid pkt_len To: Martin KaFai Lau Cc: Zhengchao Shao , ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, bigeasy@linutronix.de, imagedong@tencent.com, petrm@nvidia.com, arnd@arndb.de, dsahern@kernel.org, talalahmad@google.com, keescook@chromium.org, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, weiyongjun1@huawei.com, yuehaibing@huawei.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, hawk@kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL,USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org " On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 3:58 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 3:42 PM Martin KaFai Lau wrote: > > > > On 11/3/22 2:36 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2022 at 2:07 PM Martin KaFai Lau wrote: > > >> > > >> On 7/15/22 4:55 AM, Zhengchao Shao wrote: > > >>> Syzbot found an issue [1]: fq_codel_drop() try to drop a flow whitout any > > >>> skbs, that is, the flow->head is null. > > >>> The root cause, as the [2] says, is because that bpf_prog_test_run_skb() > > >>> run a bpf prog which redirects empty skbs. > > >>> So we should determine whether the length of the packet modified by bpf > > >>> prog or others like bpf_prog_test is valid before forwarding it directly. > > >>> > > >>> LINK: [1] https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?id=0b84da80c2917757915afa89f7738a9d16ec96c5 > > >>> LINK: [2] https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg777503.html > > >>> > > >>> Reported-by: syzbot+7a12909485b94426aceb@syzkaller.appspotmail.com > > >>> Signed-off-by: Zhengchao Shao > > >>> --- > > >>> v3: modify debug print > > >>> v2: need move checking to convert___skb_to_skb and add debug info > > >>> v1: should not check len in fast path > > >>> > > >>> include/linux/skbuff.h | 8 ++++++++ > > >>> net/bpf/test_run.c | 3 +++ > > >>> net/core/dev.c | 1 + > > >>> 3 files changed, 12 insertions(+) > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h > > >>> index f6a27ab19202..82e8368ba6e6 100644 > > >>> --- a/include/linux/skbuff.h > > >>> +++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h > > >>> @@ -2459,6 +2459,14 @@ static inline void skb_set_tail_pointer(struct sk_buff *skb, const int offset) > > >>> > > >>> #endif /* NET_SKBUFF_DATA_USES_OFFSET */ > > >>> > > >>> +static inline void skb_assert_len(struct sk_buff *skb) > > >>> +{ > > >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_NET > > >>> + if (WARN_ONCE(!skb->len, "%s\n", __func__)) > > >>> + DO_ONCE_LITE(skb_dump, KERN_ERR, skb, false); > > >>> +#endif /* CONFIG_DEBUG_NET */ > > >>> +} > > >>> + > > >>> /* > > >>> * Add data to an sk_buff > > >>> */ > > >>> diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c > > >>> index 2ca96acbc50a..dc9dc0bedca0 100644 > > >>> --- a/net/bpf/test_run.c > > >>> +++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c > > >>> @@ -955,6 +955,9 @@ static int convert___skb_to_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, struct __sk_buff *__skb) > > >>> { > > >>> struct qdisc_skb_cb *cb = (struct qdisc_skb_cb *)skb->cb; > > >>> > > >>> + if (!skb->len) > > >>> + return -EINVAL; > > >> > > >> From another recent report [0], I don't think this change is fixing the report > > >> from syzbot. It probably makes sense to revert this patch. > > >> > > >> afaict, This '!skb->len' test is done after > > >> if (is_l2) > > >> __skb_push(skb, hh_len); > > >> > > >> Hence, skb->len is not zero in convert___skb_to_skb(). The proper place to test > > >> skb->len is before __skb_push() to ensure there is some network header after the > > >> mac or may as well ensure "data_size_in > ETH_HLEN" at the beginning. > > > > > > When is_l2==true, __skb_push will result in non-zero skb->len, so we > > > should be good, right? > > > The only issue is when we do bpf_redirect into a tunneling device and > > > do __skb_pull, but that's now fixed by [0]. > > > > > > When is_l2==false, the existing check in convert___skb_to_skb will > > > make sure there is something in the l3 headers. > > > > > > So it seems like this patch is still needed. Or am I missing something? > > > > Replied in [0]. I think a small change in [0] will make this patch obsolete. > > > > My thinking is the !skb->len test in this patch does not address all cases, at > > least not the most common one (the sch_cls prog where is_l2 == true) and then it > > needs another change in __bpf_redirect_no_mac [0]. Then, instead of breaking > > the existing test cases, may as well solely depend on the change in > > __bpf_redirect_no_mac which seems to be the only redirect function that does not > > have the len check now. > > Removing this check in convert___skb_to_skb and moving the new one in > __bpf_redirect_no_mac out of (mlen) SGTM. > Can follow up unless you or Zhengchao prefer to do it. > There were some concerns about doing this len check at runtime per > packet, but not sure whether it really affects anything.. I've implemented a simple selftest for both mac/no-mac cases, and I feel like this explicit len==0 has to happen in both cases. That "skb->mac_header >= skb->network_header" check is not enough :-( I'll send the series early next week after another round of xdp metadata.. > > >> The fix in [0] is applied. If it turns out there are other cases caused by the > > >> skb generated by test_run that needs extra fixes in bpf_redirect_*, it needs to > > >> revisit an earlier !skb->len check mentioned above and the existing test cases > > >> outside of test_progs would have to adjust accordingly. > > >> > > >> [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20221027225537.353077-1-sdf@google.com/ > > >> > > >>> + > > >>> if (!__skb) > > >>> return 0; > > >>> > > >>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c > > >>> index d588fd0a54ce..716df64fcfa5 100644 > > >>> --- a/net/core/dev.c > > >>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c > > >>> @@ -4168,6 +4168,7 @@ int __dev_queue_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *sb_dev) > > >>> bool again = false; > > >>> > > >>> skb_reset_mac_header(skb); > > >>> + skb_assert_len(skb); > > >>> > > >>> if (unlikely(skb_shinfo(skb)->tx_flags & SKBTX_SCHED_TSTAMP)) > > >>> __skb_tstamp_tx(skb, NULL, NULL, skb->sk, SCM_TSTAMP_SCHED); > > >> > >