@@ -74,8 +74,8 @@ static inline int check(struct bpf_map *indirect, struct bpf_map *direct,
return 1;
}
-static inline int check_default(struct bpf_map *indirect,
- struct bpf_map *direct)
+static __attribute__ ((noinline)) int
+check_default(struct bpf_map *indirect, struct bpf_map *direct)
{
VERIFY(check(indirect, direct, sizeof(__u32), sizeof(__u32),
MAX_ENTRIES));
@@ -60,3 +60,35 @@
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 1,
},
+{
+ "bpf_map_ptr: r = 0, map_ptr = map_ptr + r",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map_hash_16b = { 4 },
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+},
+{
+ "bpf_map_ptr: r = 0, r = r + map_ptr",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map_hash_16b = { 4 },
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+},
change selftest map_ptr_kern.c which will fail without previous verifier change. Also added to verifier test for both "map_ptr += scalar" and "scalar += map_ptr" arithmetic. Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> --- .../selftests/bpf/progs/map_ptr_kern.c | 4 +-- .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)