From e7d28823c662128caae63f14e16bd394916c139b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2026 23:47:53 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] bpf: Reject legacy packet loads from callbacks check_ld_abs() models a failed BPF_LD_ABS or BPF_LD_IND in a subprogram as an implicit return with R0 set to zero. It calls prepare_func_exit() to explore this synthesized path. When the load is reached directly from a synchronous callback, prepare_func_exit() enforces the callback return contract and marks R0 precise. R0 is not derived from a real instruction on this path, so precision backtracking reaches the callback call with R0 still requested and triggers the "callback unexpected regs" verifier bug. A privileged program loader can therefore cause a verifier warning and an -EFAULT BPF_PROG_LOAD. These legacy packet-load instructions are deprecated. Reject them from callbacks rather than complicating their implicit-return model. Check all active frames before constructing the implicit return so nested static subprograms cannot hide the callback context. Global functions are verified independently with a fresh frame zero, so an active-frame check cannot identify a global function called from a callback. Also check the complete subprogram call graph during stack-depth validation and reject a function containing a legacy load when any caller is a callback. This covers global and static descendants without making has_ld_abs transitive, preserving its per-function BTF return-type check. Ordinary uses outside callbacks remain supported. Fixes: ee861486e377 ("bpf: Fix ld_{abs,ind} failure path analysis in subprogs") Reported-by: Sashiko Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260903152147.C0E241F00A3A@smtp.kernel.org Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260903214758.2727663-8-memxor@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 2b7e5c9b3ffc..d7dd0befbd10 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -5302,6 +5302,15 @@ static int check_max_stack_depth_subprog(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, if (!priv_stack_supported) subprog[idx].priv_stack_mode = NO_PRIV_STACK; process_func: + if (subprog[idx].has_ld_abs) { + for (tmp = idx; tmp >= 0; tmp = dinfo[tmp].caller) { + if (subprog[tmp].is_cb) { + verbose(env, "cannot use BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] within callback\n"); + return -EINVAL; + } + } + } + /* protect against potential stack overflow that might happen when * bpf2bpf calls get combined with tailcalls. Limit the caller's stack * depth for such case down to 256 so that the worst case scenario @@ -17182,6 +17191,7 @@ static bool may_access_skb(enum bpf_prog_type type) */ static int check_ld_abs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn) { + struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state; struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env); static const int ctx_reg = BPF_REG_6; u8 mode = BPF_MODE(insn->code); @@ -17192,6 +17202,13 @@ static int check_ld_abs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn) return -EINVAL; } + for (i = state->curframe; i; i--) { + if (state->frame[i]->in_callback_fn) { + verbose(env, "cannot use BPF_LD_[ABS|IND] within callback\n"); + return -EINVAL; + } + } + if (!env->ops->gen_ld_abs) { verifier_bug(env, "gen_ld_abs is null"); return -EFAULT;