From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f178.google.com (mail-pl1-f178.google.com [209.85.214.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 39DAC280CE3 for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 20:40:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.178 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747860038; cv=none; b=ahD1HhV0qkVxYyjxsxcXA3MhziM+hIuDhr2OInXqgMQI2BrDTN+uL6e4g0JUZsln8dqCZtjfaPovTDkCeEa7XPy9IxWhpltSsg96ACVDkdMyA3b4ze08j/cOqTicDJ8p6mfzOXNiW61gUjbv1TfkHxg1cZKSy5/7EA6Ry/QmVAI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747860038; c=relaxed/simple; bh=zbjY1wizS23vo58PabGXx/GKrU4ugGQE+QWdx9Y90HE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Qr4KJhiqBHNLSuMR6wMeea5j6q7InUjlzjStkG38Wj6p6gxH+H+wb7TxiKwW36l8TcWgUpG8RtpOxmpVqC8Sj4Np56wG7XGdPOZ8dMs+PQy8Ns2uIWmXEN79mLsUwSoEhfhxrLF1O8rsEOT1V2GZp0l9EC7oxtTCVwqFP8Yc+qo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b=TjAQIjZP; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.178 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=google.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="TjAQIjZP" Received: by mail-pl1-f178.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-231f61dc510so1143635ad.0 for ; Wed, 21 May 2025 13:40:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1747860036; x=1748464836; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=e8RIINbhOGI/c2NEEqIGsIubtNjwgvOZk5mJqYlzXzg=; b=TjAQIjZP6FCN5hWP+eyi1ayVY1f9+gOmKc9VUpQFB1MKsiVCa4YmBSbMOX5JMQ03AF wfp8kskeIOiDcceW6ExRJJv1kRFcjaFVeRwmg8uIZcKFddwk/X1/EZMHNUfkPUYJ+C3K A5nLsyjUBhhFvEDsIVrbuXXfdQs747V76LwV89j0MS1XatYC5TbtGqIPacRzFSGse2Mx OVeHwAnRp619ak/QZvACf6AseZPR0XhtAhz8tUKXflzvJLzoGX5yOT1QQT0nZFv+W9dA isWla/mge0aEsbnsAan8bsA6fgJKcbNGUIUXw3ywcfT95cH7364fZVDrhS/VDdxzJq5a 9NOA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1747860036; x=1748464836; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=e8RIINbhOGI/c2NEEqIGsIubtNjwgvOZk5mJqYlzXzg=; b=XehxeiC62cSfsCjIq8ZhHqBCRiZZvHnWFUsw3lvbVqA+jC+yCj2LI2Fp53EwkH0yxz McwaNj+Q8gGHLJtFfevad1+WEdcaNsRUxX4Z8iEfJS9Bua9JfzCRWcS+R0W0hZmpGvQi uEeNA7n/oZ4X1WAj7UnD4BYalsN94iju2NDl0+nQtI05XH2h6pF6FaxMcrv16i9rEUvI Lftxf/SMpTC7QdXbIMLLIja/fyeRnuea4CzSpAH25WNq6bNnsT3r2UC8zkYspCOiqJCW BnwupwQKfECUDfn3cyq0ouYG/Cn0vayP+6ue9XYbF+1b36pLEaefxco4tFOe2kEQlDUy 2doQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXWdWNtuaRAq1KlgVT+g+A1Ya7fpbQIwoANOH/2V4SC/LPi/vQIqzPC8OPSK1xkxp8m7Mg=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyx1ihDlX+QY1omyvpyCaSK9l/O3YH26syJ0y0lwiYZBiSpENF+ epoEAiJwdips1X9rvlO8HikluDINwJExDqyf0/BfUTIY71O2PLNTQ1AygVIwUSeOwQ== X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncso8G0NOaQ4zcKVvrwQRoZ+GRmYtWv3+wxmRupn5IAajFpkk+yFRZO6GetFVYU N7gxJCXnbup9SArSZBTp3i5jE54lkmDt3M/9OJEKfgHikSG//khdUktOZmuGh/P75mBeI663RgC /VTJrcSiSX3z7i8mKe9jjqaHYSMnKVnxG2UoFlckHvUVpEo7ufqZJfUpuVFALka7iDrPMk5bU38 dpSHUx8LR04otx1L5bwcOMBh8S18UYEecCtg+1bfYM6Q89I8d8hxs03pX0BRPYdhX1YcEM3vhgX l69MMy02oWkOyXaEUnQ0kdSkLntuJlOOIXz0ZQYwDes73V6joMekbdKqgEaUe2uxgSWCu1Vatm8 XcrHwuqnUIDszGNmrhI9FMnY9vYM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFWhfr8eMQeyoGAHZpfW3xBnV+hWPIDqTflQQXz1A1UZnZRmo37vQSO8OyDvOPpm/xdlB+AMQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:1b66:b0:22e:1858:fc25 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-233d6dda119mr168815ad.9.1747860036185; Wed, 21 May 2025 13:40:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com (202.108.125.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.125.108.202]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-b26eb084cd2sm10025558a12.54.2025.05.21.13.40.34 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 21 May 2025 13:40:35 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 21 May 2025 20:40:30 +0000 From: Peilin Ye To: Alexei Starovoitov Cc: Eduard Zingerman , Puranjay Mohan , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , John Fastabend , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa , bpf , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: verifier: support BPF_LOAD_ACQ in insn_def_regno() Message-ID: References: <20250521183911.21781-1-puranjay@kernel.org> <80ef5e2e-c2d9-45b7-9a48-f8c1a4767eae@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 01:04:47PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Wed, May 21, 2025 at 12:13 PM Eduard Zingerman wrote: > > I'm confused, is_atomic_load_insn() is defined as: > > > > return BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_STX && > > BPF_MODE(insn->code) == BPF_ATOMIC && > > insn->imm == BPF_LOAD_ACQ; > > > > And insn_def_regno() has the following case: > > > > case BPF_STX: > > if (BPF_MODE(insn->code) == BPF_ATOMIC || > > BPF_MODE(insn->code) == BPF_PROBE_ATOMIC) { > > if (insn->imm == BPF_CMPXCHG) > > return BPF_REG_0; > > else if (insn->imm == BPF_LOAD_ACQ) > > return insn->dst_reg; > > else if (insn->imm & BPF_FETCH) > > return insn->src_reg; > > } > > return -1; > > > > Why is it not triggering? > > > > Also, can this be tested with a BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 flag? > > E.g. see verifier_scalar_ids.c:linked_regs_and_subreg_def() test case. > > I suspect it was already fixed by commit > fce7bd8e385a ("bpf/verifier: Handle BPF_LOAD_ACQ instructions in > insn_def_regno()") Ah, right; I did it when adding support for riscv64 (which needs_zext). I targeted bpf-next because at that time only x86_64 and arm64 (both !needs_zext) supported BPF_LOAD_ACQ, and didn't realize this could affect arm32 (needs_zext). It should've targeted bpf with a Fixes: tag instead. Sorry for any confusion. Thanks, Peilin Ye