diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v2,01/11] bpf: factor out visit_func_call_insn() in check_cfg()

Message ID 20210217181803.3189758-1-yhs@fb.com (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series bpf: add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/cover_letter success Link
netdev/fixes_present success Link
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 6 maintainers not CCed: andrii@kernel.org netdev@vger.kernel.org john.fastabend@gmail.com kpsingh@kernel.org songliubraving@fb.com kafai@fb.com
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Link
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 17 this patch: 17
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/verify_fixes success Link
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: line length of 81 exceeds 80 columns
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 17 this patch: 17
netdev/header_inline success Link
netdev/stable success Stable not CCed

Commit Message

Yonghong Song Feb. 17, 2021, 6:18 p.m. UTC
During verifier check_cfg(), all instructions are
visited to ensure verifier can handle program control flows.
This patch factored out function visit_func_call_insn()
so it can be reused in later patch to visit callback function
calls. There is no functionality change for this patch.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++------------
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 11a242932a2c..e3149239b346 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -8591,6 +8591,27 @@  static int push_insn(int t, int w, int e, struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	return DONE_EXPLORING;
 }
 
+static int visit_func_call_insn(int t, int insn_cnt,
+				struct bpf_insn *insns,
+				struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+				bool visit_callee)
+{
+	int ret;
+
+	ret = push_insn(t, t + 1, FALLTHROUGH, env, false);
+	if (ret)
+		return ret;
+
+	if (t + 1 < insn_cnt)
+		init_explored_state(env, t + 1);
+	if (visit_callee) {
+		init_explored_state(env, t);
+		ret = push_insn(t, t + insns[t].imm + 1, BRANCH,
+				env, false);
+	}
+	return ret;
+}
+
 /* Visits the instruction at index t and returns one of the following:
  *  < 0 - an error occurred
  *  DONE_EXPLORING - the instruction was fully explored
@@ -8611,18 +8632,8 @@  static int visit_insn(int t, int insn_cnt, struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 		return DONE_EXPLORING;
 
 	case BPF_CALL:
-		ret = push_insn(t, t + 1, FALLTHROUGH, env, false);
-		if (ret)
-			return ret;
-
-		if (t + 1 < insn_cnt)
-			init_explored_state(env, t + 1);
-		if (insns[t].src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_CALL) {
-			init_explored_state(env, t);
-			ret = push_insn(t, t + insns[t].imm + 1, BRANCH,
-					env, false);
-		}
-		return ret;
+		return visit_func_call_insn(t, insn_cnt, insns, env,
+					    insns[t].src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_CALL);
 
 	case BPF_JA:
 		if (BPF_SRC(insns[t].code) != BPF_K)