From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, memxor@gmail.com, ameryhung@gmail.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-patches-bot@fb.com,
Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add tests to verify freeing the special fields when update hash and local storage maps
Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2025 23:24:51 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251030152451.62778-5-leon.hwang@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251030152451.62778-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Add tests to verify that updating hash and local storage maps decrements
refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
The tests perform the following steps:
1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
4. Add the node to a linked list.
5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 134 +++++++++++++++++-
.../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 129 +++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 262 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
index d6bd5e16e6372..0ec91ff914af7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@
#include <test_progs.h>
#include <network_helpers.h>
-
+#include "cgroup_helpers.h"
#include "refcounted_kptr.skel.h"
#include "refcounted_kptr_fail.skel.h"
@@ -44,3 +44,135 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
}
+
+static void test_refcnt_leak(struct refcounted_kptr *skel, int key, void *values, size_t values_sz,
+ u64 flags, struct bpf_map *map, struct bpf_program *prog_leak,
+ struct bpf_program *prog_check, struct bpf_test_run_opts *opts)
+{
+ int ret, fd;
+
+ ret = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(ret, "bpf_map__update_elem init"))
+ return;
+
+ fd = bpf_program__fd(prog_leak);
+ ret = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(ret, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
+ return;
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->kptr_refcount, 2, "refcount"))
+ return;
+
+ ret = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, flags);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(ret, "bpf_map__update_elem dec refcount"))
+ return;
+
+ fd = bpf_program__fd(prog_check);
+ ret = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, opts);
+ ASSERT_OK(ret, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
+ ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->kptr_refcount, 1, "refcount");
+}
+
+static void test_percpu_hash_refcount_leak(void)
+{
+ struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
+ size_t values_sz;
+ u64 *values;
+ int cpu_nr;
+ LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
+ .data_in = &pkt_v4,
+ .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
+ .repeat = 1,
+ );
+
+ cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
+ if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
+ return;
+
+ values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
+ return;
+
+ skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
+ free(values);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
+ memset(values, 0, values_sz);
+
+ test_refcnt_leak(skel, 0, values, values_sz, 0, skel->maps.pcpu_hash,
+ skel->progs.pcpu_hash_refcount_leak,
+ skel->progs.check_pcpu_hash_refcount, &opts);
+
+ refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
+ free(values);
+}
+
+struct lock_map_value {
+ u64 kptr;
+ struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
+ int value;
+};
+
+static void test_hash_lock_refcount_leak(void)
+{
+ struct lock_map_value value = {};
+ struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
+ LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
+ .data_in = &pkt_v4,
+ .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
+ .repeat = 1,
+ );
+
+ skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load"))
+ return;
+
+ test_refcnt_leak(skel, 0, &value, sizeof(value), BPF_F_LOCK, skel->maps.lock_hash,
+ skel->progs.hash_lock_refcount_leak,
+ skel->progs.check_hash_lock_refcount, &opts);
+
+ refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
+}
+
+static void test_cgroup_storage_lock_refcount_leak(void)
+{
+ struct lock_map_value value = {};
+ struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
+ int cgroup, err;
+ LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts);
+
+ err = setup_cgroup_environment();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "setup_cgroup_environment"))
+ return;
+
+ cgroup = get_root_cgroup();
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(cgroup, 0, "get_root_cgroup")) {
+ cleanup_cgroup_environment();
+ return;
+ }
+
+ skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load"))
+ goto out;
+
+ test_refcnt_leak(skel, cgroup, &value, sizeof(value), BPF_F_LOCK, skel->maps.cgrp_strg,
+ skel->progs.cgroup_storage_lock_refcount_leak,
+ skel->progs.check_cgroup_storage_lock_refcount, &opts);
+
+ refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
+out:
+ close(cgroup);
+ cleanup_cgroup_environment();
+}
+
+void test_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
+{
+ if (test__start_subtest("percpu_hash_refcount_leak"))
+ test_percpu_hash_refcount_leak();
+ if (test__start_subtest("hash_lock_refcount_leak"))
+ test_hash_lock_refcount_leak();
+ if (test__start_subtest("cgroup_storage_lock_refcount_leak"))
+ test_cgroup_storage_lock_refcount_leak();
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
index 893a4fdb4b6e9..101ba630d93e8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
@@ -568,4 +568,133 @@ int BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
return 0;
}
+private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
+u32 kptr_refcount;
+
+static int probe_read_refcount(void)
+{
+ bpf_probe_read_kernel(&kptr_refcount, sizeof(kptr_refcount), (void *) ref);
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct bpf_spin_lock *lock,
+ struct node_data __kptr **node)
+{
+ struct node_data *n, *m;
+
+ n = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*n));
+ if (!n)
+ return 0;
+
+ m = bpf_refcount_acquire(n);
+ n = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, n);
+ if (n) {
+ bpf_obj_drop(n);
+ bpf_obj_drop(m);
+ return 0;
+ }
+
+ bpf_spin_lock(lock);
+ bpf_list_push_front(head, &m->l);
+ ref = (u64)(void *) &m->ref;
+ bpf_spin_unlock(lock);
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
+static void *__lookup_map(void *map)
+{
+ int key = 0;
+
+ return bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, &key);
+}
+
+struct {
+ __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH);
+ __type(key, int);
+ __type(value, struct map_value);
+ __uint(max_entries, 1);
+} pcpu_hash SEC(".maps");
+
+SEC("tc")
+int pcpu_hash_refcount_leak(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct map_value *v;
+
+ v = __lookup_map(&pcpu_hash);
+ if (!v)
+ return 0;
+
+ return __insert_in_list(&head, &lock, &v->node);
+}
+
+SEC("tc")
+int check_pcpu_hash_refcount(void *ctx)
+{
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
+struct lock_map_value {
+ struct node_data __kptr *node;
+ struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
+ int value;
+};
+
+struct {
+ __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH);
+ __type(key, int);
+ __type(value, struct lock_map_value);
+ __uint(max_entries, 1);
+} lock_hash SEC(".maps");
+
+SEC("tc")
+int hash_lock_refcount_leak(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct lock_map_value *v;
+
+ v = __lookup_map(&lock_hash);
+ if (!v)
+ return 0;
+
+ bpf_spin_lock(&v->lock);
+ v->value = 42;
+ bpf_spin_unlock(&v->lock);
+ return __insert_in_list(&head, &lock, &v->node);
+}
+
+SEC("tc")
+int check_hash_lock_refcount(void *ctx)
+{
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
+struct {
+ __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_CGRP_STORAGE);
+ __uint(map_flags, BPF_F_NO_PREALLOC);
+ __type(key, int);
+ __type(value, struct lock_map_value);
+} cgrp_strg SEC(".maps");
+
+SEC("syscall")
+int BPF_PROG(cgroup_storage_lock_refcount_leak)
+{
+ struct lock_map_value *v;
+ struct task_struct *task;
+
+ task = bpf_get_current_task_btf();
+ bpf_rcu_read_lock();
+ v = bpf_cgrp_storage_get(&cgrp_strg, task->cgroups->dfl_cgrp, 0,
+ BPF_LOCAL_STORAGE_GET_F_CREATE);
+ bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
+ if (!v)
+ return 0;
+
+ return __insert_in_list(&head, &lock, &v->node);
+}
+
+SEC("syscall")
+int BPF_PROG(check_cgroup_storage_lock_refcount)
+{
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
--
2.51.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-30 15:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-30 15:24 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/4] bpf: Free special fields when update hash and local storage maps Leon Hwang
2025-10-30 15:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
2025-10-30 15:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: Free special fields when update hash maps with BPF_F_LOCK Leon Hwang
2025-10-30 15:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: Free special fields when update local storage " Leon Hwang
2025-10-30 22:35 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-11-03 5:17 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-03 17:24 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-30 15:24 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-11-04 17:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add tests to verify freeing the special fields when update hash and local storage maps Yonghong Song
2025-11-05 2:14 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-05 3:35 ` Yonghong Song
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=20251030152451.62778-5-leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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.