bpf: Remove bpf_dump_raw_ok() check for func_info and line_info (9e794163) · Commits · 戴 / test

The func_info and line_info have the bpf insn offset but they do not contain kernel address. They will still be useful for the userspace tool to annotate the xlated insn. This patch removes the bpf_dump_raw_ok() guard for the func_info and line_info during bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd(). The guard stays for jited_line_info which contains the kernel address. Although this bpf_dump_raw_ok() guard behavior has started since the earlier func_info patch series, I marked the Fixes tag to the latest line_info patch series which contains both func_info and line_info and this patch is fixing for both of them. Fixes: ("bpf: Add bpf_line_info support") Signed-off-by:

Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> Signed-off-by:

Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>

kernel/bpf/syscall.c

+12 −20

Original line number	Diff line number	Diff line
		@@ -2272,7 +2272,6 @@ static int bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd(struct bpf_prog *prog,
		ulen = info.nr_func_info;
		info.nr_func_info = prog->aux->func_info_cnt;
		if (info.nr_func_info && ulen) {
		if (bpf_dump_raw_ok()) {
		char __user *user_finfo;

		user_finfo = u64_to_user_ptr(info.func_info);
		@@ -2280,15 +2279,11 @@ static int bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd(struct bpf_prog *prog,
		if (copy_to_user(user_finfo, prog->aux->func_info,
		info.func_info_rec_size * ulen))
		return -EFAULT;
		} else {
		info.func_info = 0;
		}
		}

		ulen = info.nr_line_info;
		info.nr_line_info = prog->aux->nr_linfo;
		if (info.nr_line_info && ulen) {
		if (bpf_dump_raw_ok()) {
		__u8 __user *user_linfo;

		user_linfo = u64_to_user_ptr(info.line_info);
		@@ -2296,9 +2291,6 @@ static int bpf_prog_get_info_by_fd(struct bpf_prog *prog,
		if (copy_to_user(user_linfo, prog->aux->linfo,
		info.line_info_rec_size * ulen))
		return -EFAULT;
		} else {
		info.line_info = 0;
		}
		}

		ulen = info.nr_jited_line_info;

Admin message