bpf: improve verifier state equivalence
since UNKNOWN_VALUE type is weaker than CONST_IMM we can un-teach verifier its recognition of constants in conditional branches without affecting safety. Ex: if (reg == 123) { .. here verifier was marking reg->type as CONST_IMM instead keep reg as UNKNOWN_VALUE } Two verifier states with UNKNOWN_VALUE are equivalent, whereas CONST_IMM_X != CONST_IMM_Y, since CONST_IMM is used for stack range verification and other cases. So help search pruning by marking registers as UNKNOWN_VALUE where possible instead of CONST_IMM. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment