kernel.git/kernel/bpf/verifier.c, branch master

Merge tag 'bpf-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf

2026-03-07T20:20:37Z

Pull bpf fixes from Alexei Starovoitov: - Fix u32/s32 bounds when ranges cross min/max boundary (Eduard Zingerman) - Fix precision backtracking with linked registers (Eduard Zingerman) - Fix linker flags detection for resolve_btfids (Ihor Solodrai) - Fix race in update_ftrace_direct_add/del (Jiri Olsa) - Fix UAF in bpf_trampoline_link_cgroup_shim (Lang Xu) * tag 'bpf-fixes' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf: resolve_btfids: Fix linker flags detection selftests/bpf: add reproducer for spurious precision propagation through calls bpf: collect only live registers in linked regs Revert "selftests/bpf: Update reg_bound range refinement logic" selftests/bpf: test refining u32/s32 bounds when ranges cross min/max boundary bpf: Fix u32/s32 bounds when ranges cross min/max boundary bpf: Fix a UAF issue in bpf_trampoline_link_cgroup_shim ftrace: Add missing ftrace_lock to update_ftrace_direct_add/del

bpf: collect only live registers in linked regs

2026-03-07T05:49:40Z

Fix an inconsistency between func_states_equal() and collect_linked_regs(): - regsafe() uses check_ids() to verify that cached and current states have identical register id mapping. - func_states_equal() calls regsafe() only for registers computed as live by compute_live_registers(). - clean_live_states() is supposed to remove dead registers from cached states, but it can skip states belonging to an iterator-based loop. - collect_linked_regs() collects all registers sharing the same id, ignoring the marks computed by compute_live_registers(). Linked registers are stored in the state's jump history. - backtrack_insn() marks all linked registers for an instruction as precise whenever one of the linked registers is precise. The above might lead to a scenario: - There is an instruction I with register rY known to be dead at I. - Instruction I is reached via two paths: first A, then B. - On path A: - There is an id link between registers rX and rY. - Checkpoint C is created at I. - Linked register set {rX, rY} is saved to the jump history. - rX is marked as precise at I, causing both rX and rY to be marked precise at C. - On path B: - There is no id link between registers rX and rY, otherwise register states are sub-states of those in C. - Because rY is dead at I, check_ids() returns true. - Current state is considered equal to checkpoint C, propagate_precision() propagates spurious precision mark for register rY along the path B. - Depending on a program, this might hit verifier_bug() in the backtrack_insn(), e.g. if rY ∈ [r1..r5] and backtrack_insn() spots a function call. The reproducer program is in the next patch. This was hit by sched_ext scx_lavd scheduler code. Changes in tests: - verifier_scalar_ids.c selftests need modification to preserve some registers as live for __msg() checks. - exceptions_assert.c adjusted to match changes in the verifier log, R0 is dead after conditional instruction and thus does not get range. - precise.c adjusted to match changes in the verifier log, register r9 is dead after comparison and it's range is not important for test. Reported-by: Emil Tsalapatis Fixes: 0fb3cf6110a5 ("bpf: use register liveness information for func_states_equal") Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260306-linked-regs-and-propagate-precision-v1-1-18e859be570d@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Fix u32/s32 bounds when ranges cross min/max boundary

2026-03-07T02:16:06Z

Same as in __reg64_deduce_bounds(), refine s32/u32 ranges in __reg32_deduce_bounds() in the following situations: - s32 range crosses U32_MAX/0 boundary, positive part of the s32 range overlaps with u32 range: 0 U32_MAX | [xxxxxxxxxxxxxx u32 range xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] | |----------------------------|----------------------------| |xxxxx s32 range xxxxxxxxx] [xxxxxxx| 0 S32_MAX S32_MIN -1 - s32 range crosses U32_MAX/0 boundary, negative part of the s32 range overlaps with u32 range: 0 U32_MAX | [xxxxxxxxxxxxxx u32 range xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] | |----------------------------|----------------------------| |xxxxxxxxx] [xxxxxxxxxxxx s32 range | 0 S32_MAX S32_MIN -1 - No refinement if ranges overlap in two intervals. This helps for e.g. consider the following program: call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32]; w0 &= 0xffffffff; if w0 < 0x3 goto 1f; // on fall-through u32 range [3..U32_MAX] if w0 s> 0x1 goto 1f; // on fall-through s32 range [S32_MIN..1] if w0 s< 0x0 goto 1f; // range can be narrowed to [S32_MIN..-1] r10 = 0; 1: ...; The reg_bounds.c selftest is updated to incorporate identical logic, refinement based on non-overflowing range halves: ((x ∩ [0, smax]) ∩ (y ∩ [0, smax])) ∪ ((x ∩ [smin,-1]) ∩ (y ∩ [smin,-1])) Reported-by: Andrea Righi Reported-by: Emil Tsalapatis Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/aakqucg4vcujVwif@gpd4/T/ Reviewed-by: Emil Tsalapatis Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260306-bpf-32-bit-range-overflow-v3-1-f7f67e060a6b@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: drop kthread_exit from noreturn_deny

2026-03-06T16:25:54Z

kthread_exit became a macro to do_exit in commit 28aaa9c39945 ("kthread: consolidate kthread exit paths to prevent use-after-free"), so there is no kthread_exit function BTF ID to resolve. Remove it from noreturn_deny to avoid resolve_btfids unresolved symbol warnings. Signed-off-by: Christian Loehle Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds

bpf: Improve bounds when tnum has a single possible value

2026-02-28T00:11:50Z

We're hitting an invariant violation in Cilium that sometimes leads to BPF programs being rejected and Cilium failing to start [1]. The following extract from verifier logs shows what's happening: from 201 to 236: R1=0 R6=ctx() R7=1 R9=scalar(smin=umin=smin32=umin32=3584,smax=umax=smax32=umax32=3840,var_off=(0xe00; 0x100)) R10=fp0 236: R1=0 R6=ctx() R7=1 R9=scalar(smin=umin=smin32=umin32=3584,smax=umax=smax32=umax32=3840,var_off=(0xe00; 0x100)) R10=fp0 ; if (magic == MARK_MAGIC_HOST || magic == MARK_MAGIC_OVERLAY || magic == MARK_MAGIC_ENCRYPT) @ bpf_host.c:1337 236: (16) if w9 == 0xe00 goto pc+45 ; R9=scalar(smin=umin=smin32=umin32=3585,smax=umax=smax32=umax32=3840,var_off=(0xe00; 0x100)) 237: (16) if w9 == 0xf00 goto pc+1 verifier bug: REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION (false_reg1): range bounds violation u64=[0xe01, 0xe00] s64=[0xe01, 0xe00] u32=[0xe01, 0xe00] s32=[0xe01, 0xe00] var_off=(0xe00, 0x0) We reach instruction 236 with two possible values for R9, 0xe00 and 0xf00. This is perfectly reflected in the tnum, but of course the ranges are less accurate and cover [0xe00; 0xf00]. Taking the fallthrough path at instruction 236 allows the verifier to reduce the range to [0xe01; 0xf00]. The tnum is however not updated. With these ranges, at instruction 237, the verifier is not able to deduce that R9 is always equal to 0xf00. Hence the fallthrough pass is explored first, the verifier refines the bounds using the assumption that R9 != 0xf00, and ends up with an invariant violation. This pattern of impossible branch + bounds refinement is common to all invariant violations seen so far. The long-term solution is likely to rely on the refinement + invariant violation check to detect dead branches, as started by Eduard. To fix the current issue, we need something with less refactoring that we can backport. This patch uses the tnum_step helper introduced in the previous patch to detect the above situation. In particular, three cases are now detected in the bounds refinement: 1. The u64 range and the tnum only overlap in umin. u64: ---[xxxxxx]----- tnum: --xx----------x- 2. The u64 range and the tnum only overlap in the maximum value represented by the tnum, called tmax. u64: ---[xxxxxx]----- tnum: xx-----x-------- 3. The u64 range and the tnum only overlap in between umin (excluded) and umax. u64: ---[xxxxxx]----- tnum: xx----x-------x- To detect these three cases, we call tnum_step(tnum, umin), which returns the smallest member of the tnum greater than umin, called tnum_next here. We're in case (1) if umin is part of the tnum and tnum_next is greater than umax. We're in case (2) if umin is not part of the tnum and tnum_next is equal to tmax. Finally, we're in case (3) if umin is not part of the tnum, tnum_next is inferior or equal to umax, and calling tnum_step a second time gives us a value past umax. This change implements these three cases. With it, the above bytecode looks as follows: 0: (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7 ; R0=scalar() 1: (47) r0 |= 3584 ; R0=scalar(smin=0x8000000000000e00,umin=umin32=3584,smin32=0x80000e00,var_off=(0xe00; 0xfffffffffffff1ff)) 2: (57) r0 &= 3840 ; R0=scalar(smin=umin=smin32=umin32=3584,smax=umax=smax32=umax32=3840,var_off=(0xe00; 0x100)) 3: (15) if r0 == 0xe00 goto pc+2 ; R0=3840 4: (15) if r0 == 0xf00 goto pc+1 4: R0=3840 6: (95) exit In addition to the new selftests, this change was also verified with Agni [3]. For the record, the raw SMT is available at [4]. The property it verifies is that: If a concrete value x is contained in all input abstract values, after __update_reg_bounds, it will continue to be contained in all output abstract values. Link: https://github.com/cilium/cilium/issues/44216 [1] Link: https://pchaigno.github.io/test-verifier-complexity.html [2] Link: https://github.com/bpfverif/agni [3] Link: https://pastebin.com/raw/naCfaqNx [4] Fixes: 0df1a55afa83 ("bpf: Warn on internal verifier errors") Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman Tested-by: Marco Schirrmeister Co-developed-by: Harishankar Vishwanathan Signed-off-by: Harishankar Vishwanathan Signed-off-by: Paul Chaignon Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/ef254c4f68be19bd393d450188946821c588565d.1772225741.git.paul.chaignon@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

Convert 'alloc_obj' family to use the new default GFP_KERNEL argument

2026-02-22T01:09:51Z

This was done entirely with mindless brute force, using git grep -l '\

treewide: Replace kmalloc with kmalloc_obj for non-scalar types

2026-02-21T09:02:28Z

This is the result of running the Coccinelle script from scripts/coccinelle/api/kmalloc_objs.cocci. The script is designed to avoid scalar types (which need careful case-by-case checking), and instead replace kmalloc-family calls that allocate struct or union object instances: Single allocations: kmalloc(sizeof(TYPE), ...) are replaced with: kmalloc_obj(TYPE, ...) Array allocations: kmalloc_array(COUNT, sizeof(TYPE), ...) are replaced with: kmalloc_objs(TYPE, COUNT, ...) Flex array allocations: kmalloc(struct_size(PTR, FAM, COUNT), ...) are replaced with: kmalloc_flex(*PTR, FAM, COUNT, ...) (where TYPE may also be *VAR) The resulting allocations no longer return "void *", instead returning "TYPE *". Signed-off-by: Kees Cook

bpf: Add a map/btf from a fd array more consistently

2026-02-13T22:37:02Z

The add_fd_from_fd_array() function takes a file descriptor as a parameter and tries to add either map or btf to the corresponding list of used objects. As was reported by Dan Carpenter, since the commit c81e4322acf0 ("bpf: Fix a potential use-after-free of BTF object"), the fdget() is called twice on the file descriptor, and thus userspace, potentially, can replace the file pointed to by the file descriptor in between the two calls. On practice, this shouldn't break anything on the kernel side, but for consistency fix the code such that only one fdget() is executed. Reported-by: Dan Carpenter Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/aY689z7gHNv8rgVO@stanley.mountain/ Fixes: ccd2d799ed44 ("bpf: Fix a potential use-after-free of BTF object") Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260213212949.759321-1-a.s.protopopov@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Fix a potential use-after-free of BTF object

2026-02-13T22:14:27Z

Refcounting in the check_pseudo_btf_id() function is incorrect: the __check_pseudo_btf_id() function might get called with a zero refcounted btf. Fix this, and patch related code accordingly. v3: rephrase a comment (AI) v2: fix a refcount leak introduced in v1 (AI) Reported-by: syzbot+5a0f1995634f7c1dadbf@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=5a0f1995634f7c1dadbf Fixes: 76145f725532 ("bpf: Refactor check_pseudo_btf_id") Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260209132904.63908-1-a.s.protopopov@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: Support negative offsets, BPF_SUB, and alu32 for linked register tracking

2026-02-04T21:35:28Z

Previously, the verifier only tracked positive constant deltas between linked registers using BPF_ADD. This limitation meant patterns like: r1 = r0; r1 += -4; if r1 s>= 0 goto l0_%=; // r1 >= 0 implies r0 >= 4 // verifier couldn't propagate bounds back to r0 if r0 != 0 goto l0_%=; r0 /= 0; // Verifier thinks this is reachable l0_%=: Similar limitation exists for 32-bit registers. With this change, the verifier can now track negative deltas in reg->off enabling bound propagation for the above pattern. For alu32, we make sure the destination register has the upper 32 bits as 0s before creating the link. BPF_ADD_CONST is split into BPF_ADD_CONST64 and BPF_ADD_CONST32, the latter is used in case of alu32 and sync_linked_regs uses this to zext the result if known_reg has this flag. Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260204151741.2678118-2-puranjay@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov