All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: stable@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	yhs@fb.com, mykolal@fb.com, luizcap@amazon.com
Subject: [PATCH 6.1.y 5/6] selftests/bpf: Workaround verification failure for fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code
Date: Sat, 22 Jul 2023 03:45:13 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230722004514.767618-6-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230722004514.767618-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>

From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>

[ Upstream commit 63d78b7e8ca2d0eb8c687a355fa19d01b6fcc723 ]

With latest llvm17, selftest fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code
has the following verification failure:

  0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
  ; int connect_v4_prog(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
  0: (bf) r7 = r1                       ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R7_w=ctx(off=0,imm=0)
  1: (b4) w6 = 0                        ; R6_w=0
  ; memset(&tuple.ipv4.saddr, 0, sizeof(tuple.ipv4.saddr));
  ...
  ; return do_bind(ctx) ? 1 : 0;
  179: (bf) r1 = r7                     ; R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R7=ctx(off=0,imm=0)
  180: (85) call pc+147
  Func#3 is global and valid. Skipping.
  181: R0_w=scalar()
  181: (bc) w6 = w0                     ; R0_w=scalar() R6_w=scalar(umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
  182: (05) goto pc-129
  ; }
  54: (bc) w0 = w6                      ; R0_w=scalar(umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) R6_w=scalar(umax=4294967295,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
  55: (95) exit
  At program exit the register R0 has value (0x0; 0xffffffff) should have been in (0x0; 0x1)
  processed 281 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 1 total_states 26 peak_states 26 mark_read 13
  -- END PROG LOAD LOG --
  libbpf: prog 'connect_v4_prog': failed to load: -22

The corresponding source code:

  __attribute__ ((noinline))
  int do_bind(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
  {
        struct sockaddr_in sa = {};

        sa.sin_family = AF_INET;
        sa.sin_port = bpf_htons(0);
        sa.sin_addr.s_addr = bpf_htonl(SRC_REWRITE_IP4);

        if (bpf_bind(ctx, (struct sockaddr *)&sa, sizeof(sa)) != 0)
                return 0;

        return 1;
  }
  ...
  SEC("cgroup/connect4")
  int connect_v4_prog(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
  {
  ...
        return do_bind(ctx) ? 1 : 0;
  }

Insn 180 is a call to 'do_bind'. The call's return value is also the return value
for the program. Since do_bind() returns 0/1, so it is legitimate for compiler to
optimize 'return do_bind(ctx) ? 1 : 0' to 'return do_bind(ctx)'. However, such
optimization breaks verifier as the return value of 'do_bind()' is marked as any
scalar which violates the requirement of prog return value 0/1.

There are two ways to fix this problem, (1) changing 'return 1' in do_bind() to
e.g. 'return 10' so the compiler has to do 'do_bind(ctx) ? 1 :0', or (2)
suggested by Andrii, marking do_bind() with __weak attribute so the compiler
cannot make any assumption on do_bind() return value.

This patch adopted adding __weak approach which is simpler and more resistant
to potential compiler optimizations.

Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230310012410.2920570-1-yhs@fb.com
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c
index ec25371de789..7ef49ec04838 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c
@@ -32,7 +32,7 @@
 #define IFNAMSIZ 16
 #endif
 
-__attribute__ ((noinline))
+__attribute__ ((noinline)) __weak
 int do_bind(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
 {
 	struct sockaddr_in sa = {};
-- 
2.41.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-07-22  0:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-07-22  0:45 [PATCH 6.1.y 0/6] BPF selftests fixes for 6.1 branch Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-22  0:45 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 1/6] bpf: allow precision tracking for programs with subprogs Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-22  0:45 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 2/6] bpf: stop setting precise in current state Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-22  0:45 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 3/6] bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-22  0:45 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 4/6] selftests/bpf: make test_align selftest more robust Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-22  0:45 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-07-22  0:45 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 6/6] selftests/bpf: Fix sk_assign on s390x Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-23 20:33 ` [PATCH 6.1.y 0/6] BPF selftests fixes for 6.1 branch Greg KH

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20230722004514.767618-6-eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=luizcap@amazon.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=mykolal@fb.com \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.