From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
kkd@meta.com, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/16] bpf: Track verifier context diagnostic events
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 01:33:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260812233326.3575958-8-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260812233326.3575958-1-memxor@gmail.com>
Record verifier context transitions in the diagnostic history so later reports
can anchor causal paths to the critical section that made an operation invalid.
This covers lock, IRQ, RCU, and preempt regions without adding any new
verifier error reports. Category-specific commits decide where those recorded
events should be rendered.
Use context depth when selecting scoped history so nested regions anchor at the
outer active region, and fall back to the earliest retained event when the
matching entry was pruned.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
kernel/bpf/diagnostics.c | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/bpf/diagnostics.h | 12 ++++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.c b/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.c
index 0143ffe6fa03..823e0a7a0638 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.c
@@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ enum bpf_diag_history_kind {
BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_MOD,
BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_REF_ACQUIRE,
BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_REF_RELEASE,
+ BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_CONTEXT,
};
struct bpf_diag_history_event {
@@ -69,6 +70,11 @@ struct bpf_diag_history_event {
struct {
u32 ref_id;
} ref;
+ struct {
+ u32 depth;
+ u8 kind;
+ bool enter;
+ } ctx;
};
};
@@ -335,6 +341,19 @@ void bpf_diag_event_log_reset(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 pos)
log->cnt = pos;
}
+u32 bpf_diag_irq_depth(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state)
+{
+ u32 depth = 0;
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < state->acquired_refs; i++) {
+ if (state->refs[i].type == REF_TYPE_IRQ)
+ depth++;
+ }
+
+ return depth;
+}
+
static void diag_append_history(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const struct bpf_diag_history_event *event)
{
@@ -967,3 +986,23 @@ void bpf_diag_record_ref_release(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_idx, u32
{
diag_record_ref(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_REF_RELEASE, ref_id);
}
+
+void bpf_diag_record_context(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_idx,
+ enum bpf_diag_context_kind ctx_kind, bool enter, u32 depth)
+{
+ /*
+ * Keep leave events so context rendering can stop at a depth-zero exit
+ * and show nested-region depth accurately for the active path.
+ */
+ struct bpf_diag_history_event event = {
+ .insn_idx = insn_idx,
+ .kind = BPF_DIAG_HISTORY_CONTEXT,
+ .ctx = {
+ .kind = ctx_kind,
+ .enter = enter,
+ .depth = depth,
+ },
+ };
+
+ diag_append_history(env, &event);
+}
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.h b/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.h
index 40fe161525b9..0cf5427a1a1b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.h
+++ b/kernel/bpf/diagnostics.h
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
struct bpf_reg_state;
struct bpf_verifier_env;
+struct bpf_verifier_state;
struct btf;
enum bpf_diag_mod_reason {
@@ -81,6 +82,14 @@ static inline struct bpf_diag_mod_target bpf_diag_stack_range_target(u32 frameno
};
}
+enum bpf_diag_context_kind {
+ BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_NONE,
+ BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_RCU,
+ BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_PREEMPT,
+ BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_IRQ,
+ BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_LOCK,
+};
+
bool bpf_diag_enabled(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env);
int bpf_diag_init(struct bpf_verifier_env *env);
char *bpf_diag_fmt_buf(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, size_t size);
@@ -90,6 +99,7 @@ const char *bpf_diag_fmt(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const char *fmt, ...) __p
const char *bpf_diag_fmt_btf_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const struct btf *btf, u32 type_id);
u32 bpf_diag_event_log_pos(struct bpf_verifier_env *env);
void bpf_diag_event_log_reset(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 pos);
+u32 bpf_diag_irq_depth(const struct bpf_verifier_state *state);
void bpf_diag_free(struct bpf_verifier_env *env);
void bpf_diag_header(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const char *category,
const char *problem);
@@ -105,5 +115,7 @@ void bpf_diag_record_scrub_stack(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 frameno, s16
s16 max_off, enum bpf_diag_mod_reason reason);
void bpf_diag_record_ref_acquire(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_idx, u32 ref_id);
void bpf_diag_record_ref_release(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_idx, u32 ref_id);
+void bpf_diag_record_context(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 insn_idx,
+ enum bpf_diag_context_kind ctx_kind, bool enter, u32 depth);
#endif /* __BPF_DIAGNOSTICS_H */
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 4f3416700ad7..a32f360d0f00 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -1046,7 +1046,7 @@ static int is_iter_reg_valid_init(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_s
}
static int acquire_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx);
-static int release_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int id);
+static int release_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int id);
static int mark_stack_slot_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_call_arg_meta *meta,
@@ -1105,7 +1105,7 @@ static int unmark_stack_slot_irq_flag(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_r
return -EINVAL;
}
- err = release_irq_state(env->cur_state, st->id);
+ err = release_irq_state(env, st->id);
WARN_ON_ONCE(err && err != -EACCES);
if (err) {
int insn_idx = 0;
@@ -1440,6 +1440,8 @@ static int acquire_lock_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, enum r
state->active_locks++;
state->active_lock_id = id;
state->active_lock_ptr = ptr;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_LOCK, true,
+ state->active_locks);
return 0;
}
@@ -1455,6 +1457,8 @@ static int acquire_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx)
s->id = ++env->id_gen;
state->active_irq_id = s->id;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_IRQ, true,
+ bpf_diag_irq_depth(state));
return s->id;
}
@@ -1496,8 +1500,9 @@ static bool reg_is_referenced(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const struct bpf_reg
return find_reference_state(env->cur_state, reg->id);
}
-static int release_lock_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int type, int id, void *ptr)
+static int release_lock_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int type, int id, void *ptr)
{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
void *prev_ptr = NULL;
u32 prev_id = 0;
int i;
@@ -1510,6 +1515,8 @@ static int release_lock_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int type, int id
/* Reassign active lock (id, ptr). */
state->active_lock_id = prev_id;
state->active_lock_ptr = prev_ptr;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, env->insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_LOCK,
+ false, state->active_locks);
return 0;
}
if (state->refs[i].type & REF_TYPE_LOCK_MASK) {
@@ -1520,8 +1527,9 @@ static int release_lock_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int type, int id
return -EINVAL;
}
-static int release_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int id)
+static int release_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int id)
{
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *state = env->cur_state;
u32 prev_id = 0;
int i;
@@ -1534,6 +1542,8 @@ static int release_irq_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *state, int id)
if (state->refs[i].id == id) {
release_reference_state(state, i);
state->active_irq_id = prev_id;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, env->insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_IRQ,
+ false, bpf_diag_irq_depth(state));
return 0;
} else {
prev_id = state->refs[i].id;
@@ -7142,7 +7152,7 @@ static int process_spin_lock(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state
verbose(env, "%s_unlock cannot be out of order\n", lock_str);
return -EINVAL;
}
- if (release_lock_state(cur, type, reg->id, ptr)) {
+ if (release_lock_state(env, type, reg->id, ptr)) {
verbose(env, "%s_unlock of different lock\n", lock_str);
return -EINVAL;
}
@@ -13155,22 +13165,30 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
if (rcu_lock) {
env->cur_state->active_rcu_locks++;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_RCU, true,
+ env->cur_state->active_rcu_locks);
} else if (rcu_unlock) {
if (env->cur_state->active_rcu_locks == 0) {
verbose(env, "unmatched rcu read unlock (kernel function %s)\n", func_name);
return -EINVAL;
}
env->cur_state->active_rcu_locks--;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_RCU, false,
+ env->cur_state->active_rcu_locks);
if (!in_rcu_cs(env))
invalidate_rcu_protected_refs(env);
} else if (preempt_disable) {
env->cur_state->active_preempt_locks++;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_PREEMPT, true,
+ env->cur_state->active_preempt_locks);
} else if (preempt_enable) {
if (env->cur_state->active_preempt_locks == 0) {
verbose(env, "unmatched attempt to enable preemption (kernel function %s)\n", func_name);
return -EINVAL;
}
env->cur_state->active_preempt_locks--;
+ bpf_diag_record_context(env, insn_idx, BPF_DIAG_CONTEXT_PREEMPT, false,
+ env->cur_state->active_preempt_locks);
if (!in_rcu_cs(env))
invalidate_rcu_protected_refs(env);
}
--
2.53.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-12 23:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-12 23:33 [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/16] Redesign Verification Errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/16] bpf: Add verifier diagnostics report helpers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:41 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/16] bpf: Add source and instruction diagnostic context Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-13 0:15 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/16] bpf: Add verifier diagnostic event log Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/16] bpf: Prune verifier diagnostics when switching paths Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/16] bpf: Track verifier register diagnostic events Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:53 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/16] bpf: Track verifier reference " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/16] bpf: Report Register Type Safety errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/16] bpf: Report Memory Safety bounds errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/16] bpf: Report Resource Lifetime reference leaks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 11/16] bpf: Report Call Type Safety argument errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:58 ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/16] bpf: Report Execution Context Safety errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 13/16] bpf: Report Program Structure CFG errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/16] bpf: Report Policy helper and kfunc errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 15/16] bpf: Report Verifier Limit errors Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-12 23:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 16/16] bpf: Gate verifier diagnostics on log level Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-13 1:38 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/16] Redesign Verification Errors Eduard Zingerman
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=20260812233326.3575958-8-memxor@gmail.com \
--to=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kkd@meta.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.