Re: [PATCHv5 bpf-next 19/28] libbpf: Add btf_type_is_traceable_func function

Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
Newsgroups dev.linux.lists.sashiko,org.kernel.vger.bpf
Message-ID <aec71yEZE8KF19Xz@krava>
On Sat, Apr 18, 2026 at 03:40:48AM +0000, [email protected] wrote:
> Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s):
> - [High] Unsafe BTF type resolution in `btf_type_is_traceable_func` lacks validation and bounds checking, leading to out-of-bounds read and segfault.
> - [Medium] `btf_get_type_size` hardcodes `sizeof(void *)` for pointer sizes, breaking cross-architecture analysis.
> - [Medium] Missing maximum resolution depth in type modifier loop allows Denial of Service via infinite loop.
> --
> 
> commit 70d9630993310d9569ee7d038356f4a4ec3a18e9
> Author: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]>
> 
> libbpf: Add btf_type_is_traceable_func function
> 
> Adds the btf_type_is_traceable_func function to perform checks on functions
> to prevent attachment on some functions. Exports it via libbpf_internal.h
> for use by benchmark tests.
> 
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > index 3a80a018fc7d5..65a9ac10053d5 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> 
> [ ... ]
> 
> > @@ -12425,6 +12425,80 @@ static int attach_uprobe_multi(const struct bpf_program *prog, long cookie, stru
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  
> > +#define MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS 12
> > +
> > +static bool btf_type_is_modifier(const struct btf_type *t)
> > +{
> > +	switch (BTF_INFO_KIND(t->info)) {
> > +	case BTF_KIND_TYPEDEF:
> > +	case BTF_KIND_VOLATILE:
> > +	case BTF_KIND_CONST:
> > +	case BTF_KIND_RESTRICT:
> > +	case BTF_KIND_TYPE_TAG:
> > +		return true;
> > +	default:
> > +		return false;
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> > +static int btf_get_type_size(const struct btf *btf, __u32 type_id,
> > +			     const struct btf_type **ret_type)
> > +{
> > +	const struct btf_type *t;
> > +
> > +	*ret_type = btf__type_by_id(btf, 0);
> > +	if (!type_id)
> > +		return 0;
> > +	t = btf__type_by_id(btf, type_id);
> > +	while (t && btf_type_is_modifier(t))
> > +		t = btf__type_by_id(btf, t->type);
> 
> Does this loop need a maximum resolution depth limit?
> 
> If a malformed BTF object contains a circular modifier reference (e.g.,
> typedef A -> const B -> typedef A), could this loop spin infinitely and
> cause a hang?

I will add that, something like in btf__resolve_type

> 
> > +	if (!t)
> > +		return -EINVAL;
> > +	*ret_type = t;
> > +	if (btf_is_ptr(t))
> > +		return sizeof(void *);
> 
> Does this correctly calculate the pointer size for cross-architecture
> analysis?
> 
> Since libbpf is a user-space library that may process BTF blobs from
> different architectures (like a 64-bit tool processing a 32-bit BPF
> object), will hardcoding sizeof(void *) return the host's pointer size
> instead of the target's pointer size?
> 
> Would using btf__pointer_size(btf) be more appropriate here?

yep, will change

> 
> > +	if (btf_is_int(t) || btf_is_any_enum(t) || btf_is_struct(t) || btf_is_union(t))
> > +		return t->size;
> > +	return -EINVAL;
> > +}
> > +
> > +bool btf_type_is_traceable_func(const struct btf *btf, const struct btf_type *t)
> > +{
> > +	const struct btf_param *args;
> > +	const struct btf_type *proto;
> > +	__u32 i, nargs;
> > +	int ret;
> > +
> > +	proto = btf_type_by_id(btf, t->type);
> 
> Could this cause an out-of-bounds read if t is not a function type?
> 
> Because the type and size fields share a union in struct btf_type, passing
> a type like BTF_KIND_STRUCT causes its size to be misinterpreted as a type
> ID. The internal btf_type_by_id() helper skips bounds checking.
> 
> If the interpreted ID exceeds the BTF type array bounds, it might read past
> the end of the array and return a garbage pointer, which would then be
> dereferenced in the next line.
> 
> Should this verify !btf_is_func(t) first, and use the bounds-checked public
> API btf__type_by_id() along with a NULL check for proto?

will add the check

jirka
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.