All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	Nicholas Carlini <npc@anthropic.com>,
	kkd@meta.com, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf v2 6/8] selftests/bpf: Reject graph kptr use after RCU unlock
Date: Fri,  4 Sep 2026 10:43:19 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260904084325.52250-7-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260904084325.52250-1-memxor@gmail.com>

Add a sleepable verifier test that loads a graph-node local kptr in an
explicit RCU read-side critical section, then passes its node to
bpf_rbtree_remove() after the section ends.

Before the verifier fix, the stale NON_OWN_REF flag makes the node look like
a live borrowed reference and the program is accepted. After the fix, the
pointer is demoted without NON_OWN_REF and the graph kfunc argument is
rejected.

Also exercise a graph kptr loaded while a spin lock provides implicit RCU
protection. The pointer must be invalidated when the lock is released, which
guards the required ordering between non-owning-reference invalidation and
RCU demotion.

Update the existing fault-protected load test state description. The
post-unlock pointer no longer carries NON_OWN_REF, but remains readable
because the load is rewritten to use BPF_PROBE_MEM.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/rcu_read_lock.c       |  6 +-
 .../bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c          | 75 +++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 78 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/rcu_read_lock.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/rcu_read_lock.c
index 31d4081c3a9f..cdb255addbc3 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/rcu_read_lock.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/rcu_read_lock.c
@@ -592,9 +592,9 @@ int non_own_ref_untrusted_ld(void *ctx)
 	}
 	bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
 	/*
-	 * The unlock leaves node as PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | PTR_UNTRUSTED
-	 * | NON_OWN_REF, and the load below has to get the BPF_PROBE_MEM
-	 * rewrite for it, otherwise a bad address panics the kernel.
+	 * The unlock leaves node as PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | PTR_UNTRUSTED,
+	 * and the load below has to get the BPF_PROBE_MEM rewrite for it,
+	 * otherwise a bad address panics the kernel.
 	 */
 	non_own_ref_key = node->key;
 	return 0;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
index 7d2f8897e5ad..f787ecf189d8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr_fail.c
@@ -28,6 +28,17 @@ struct map_value_refcount_only {
 	struct node_refcount_only __kptr *node;
 };
 
+struct rcu_graph_node {
+	struct bpf_rb_node node;
+	long data;
+};
+
+struct rcu_graph_node *just_here_because_btf_bug;
+
+struct map_value_rcu_graph {
+	struct rcu_graph_node __kptr *node;
+};
+
 extern void bpf_rcu_read_lock(void) __ksym;
 extern void bpf_rcu_read_unlock(void) __ksym;
 
@@ -36,6 +47,8 @@ private(A) struct bpf_spin_lock glock;
 private(A) struct bpf_rb_root groot __contains(node_acquire, node);
 private(B) struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
 private(B) struct bpf_list_head head __contains(node_refcounted, list);
+private(C) struct bpf_spin_lock graph_lock;
+private(C) struct bpf_rb_root graph_root __contains(rcu_graph_node, node);
 
 struct {
 	__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
@@ -44,6 +57,13 @@ struct {
 	__uint(max_entries, 1);
 } stashed_refcount_only SEC(".maps");
 
+struct {
+	__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
+	__type(key, int);
+	__type(value, struct map_value_rcu_graph);
+	__uint(max_entries, 1);
+} stashed_rcu_graph SEC(".maps");
+
 static bool less(struct bpf_rb_node *a, const struct bpf_rb_node *b)
 {
 	struct node_acquire *node_a;
@@ -137,6 +157,61 @@ long refcount_acquire_rcu_map_kptr_unchecked_drop(void *ctx)
 	return 0;
 }
 
+SEC("?syscall")
+__failure
+__msg("bpf_rbtree_remove can only take non-owning or refcounted "
+      "bpf_rb_node pointer")
+long rbtree_remove_after_rcu_unlock(void *ctx)
+{
+	struct map_value_rcu_graph *mapval;
+	struct bpf_rb_node *rb_node;
+	struct rcu_graph_node *node;
+	int idx = 0;
+
+	mapval = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&stashed_rcu_graph, &idx);
+	if (!mapval)
+		return 0;
+
+	bpf_rcu_read_lock();
+	node = mapval->node;
+	if (!node) {
+		bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
+		return 0;
+	}
+	bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
+
+	bpf_spin_lock(&graph_lock);
+	rb_node = bpf_rbtree_remove(&graph_root, &node->node);
+	bpf_spin_unlock(&graph_lock);
+	if (rb_node)
+		bpf_obj_drop(container_of(rb_node, struct rcu_graph_node, node));
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("?syscall")
+__failure __msg("invalid mem access 'scalar'")
+long graph_kptr_after_spin_unlock(void *ctx)
+{
+	struct map_value_rcu_graph *mapval;
+	struct rcu_graph_node *node;
+	int idx = 0;
+
+	mapval = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&stashed_rcu_graph, &idx);
+	if (!mapval)
+		return 0;
+
+	bpf_spin_lock(&graph_lock);
+	node = mapval->node;
+	if (!node) {
+		bpf_spin_unlock(&graph_lock);
+		return 0;
+	}
+	bpf_spin_unlock(&graph_lock);
+
+	return node->data;
+}
+
 SEC("?tc")
 __failure __msg("Unreleased reference id=3 alloc_insn={{[0-9]+}}")
 long rbtree_refcounted_node_ref_escapes_owning_input(void *ctx)
-- 
2.53.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-09-04  8:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-09-04  8:43 [PATCH bpf v2 0/8] Misc bug fixes - part 3 Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 1/8] bpf: Require MEM_PERCPU for percpu kptr stores Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/8] selftests/bpf: Reject non-percpu values in percpu kptr fields Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 3/8] bpf: Keep refcount_acquire nullable for borrowed RCU kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 4/8] selftests/bpf: Test borrowed refcount acquisition nullability Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  9:47   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 5/8] bpf: Clear NON_OWN_REF after RCU protection ends Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 7/8] bpf: Reject untrusted allocated-object pointers Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04  8:43 ` [PATCH bpf v2 8/8] selftests/bpf: Reject refcount acquisition after RCU unlock Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-09-04 15:00 ` [PATCH bpf v2 0/8] Misc bug fixes - part 3 patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20260904084325.52250-7-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 \
    --cc=npc@anthropic.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.