From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] bpf: verifier check for dead branch
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2020 10:16:12 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e4abe45b-2c80-9448-677c-e352f0ecb24e@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200810135451.GA699846@krava>
On 8/10/20 6:54 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 09, 2020 at 06:21:01PM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 8/7/20 10:30 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>> hi,
>>> we have a customer facing some odd verifier fails on following
>>> sk_skb program:
>>>
>>> 0. r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 + data_end)
>>> 1. r4 = *(u32 *)(r1 + data)
>>> 2. r3 = r4
>>> 3. r3 += 42
>>> 4. r1 = 0
>>> 5. if r3 > r2 goto 8
>>> 6. r4 += 14
>>> 7. r1 = r4
>>> 8. if r3 > r2 goto 10
>>> 9. r2 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 9)
>>> 10. r0 = 0
>>> 11. exit
>>>
>>> The code checks if the skb data is big enough (5) and if it is,
>>> it prepares pointer in r1 (7), then there's again size check (8)
>>> and finally data load from r1 (9).
>>>
>>> It's and odd code, but apparently this is something that can
>>> get produced by clang.
>>
>> Could you provide a test case where clang generates the above code?
>> I would like to see whether clang can do a better job to avoid
>> such codes.
>
> I get that code genrated by using recent enough upstream clang
> on the attached source.
Thanks for the test case. I can reproduce the issue. The following
is why this happens in llvm.
the pseudo IR code looks like
data = skb->data
data_end = skb->data_end
comp = data + 42 > data_end
ip = select "comp" nullptr "data + some offset"
<=== select return one of nullptr or "data + some offset"
based on "comp"
if comp // original skb_shorter condition
....
...
= ip
In llvm, bpf backend "select" actually inlined "comp" to generate proper
control flow. Therefore, comp is computed twice like below
data = skb->data
data_end = skb->data_end
if (data + 42 > data_end) {
ip = nullptr; goto block1;
} else {
ip = data + some_offset;
goto block2;
}
...
if (data + 42 > data_end) // original skb_shorter condition
The issue can be workarounded the source. Just check data + 42 >
data_end and if failure return. Then you will be able to assign
a value to "ip" conditionally.
Will try to fix this issue in llvm12 as well.
Thanks!
>
> /opt/clang/bin/clang --version
> clang version 11.0.0 (https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project.git 4cbfb98eb362b0629d5d1cd113af4427e2904763)
> Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
> Thread model: posix
> InstalledDir: /opt/clang/bin
>
> $ llvm-objdump -d verifier-cond-repro.o
>
> verifier-cond-repro.o: file format ELF64-BPF
>
> Disassembly of section .text:
>
> 0000000000000000 my_prog:
> 0: 61 12 50 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 80)
> 1: 61 14 4c 00 00 00 00 00 r4 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 76)
> 2: bf 43 00 00 00 00 00 00 r3 = r4
> 3: 07 03 00 00 2a 00 00 00 r3 += 42
> 4: b7 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0
> 5: 2d 23 02 00 00 00 00 00 if r3 > r2 goto +2 <LBB0_2>
> 6: 07 04 00 00 0e 00 00 00 r4 += 14
> 7: bf 41 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r4
>
> 0000000000000040 LBB0_2:
> 8: 2d 23 05 00 00 00 00 00 if r3 > r2 goto +5 <LBB0_5>
> 9: 71 12 09 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 9)
> 10: 56 02 03 00 11 00 00 00 if w2 != 17 goto +3 <LBB0_5>
> 11: b4 00 00 00 d2 04 00 00 w0 = 1234
> 12: 69 11 16 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 22)
> 13: 16 01 01 00 d2 04 00 00 if w1 == 1234 goto +1 <LBB0_6>
>
> 0000000000000070 LBB0_5:
> 14: b4 00 00 00 ff ff ff ff w0 = -1
>
> 0000000000000078 LBB0_6:
> 15: 95 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 exit
>
>
> thanks,
> jirka
>
>
> ---
> // Copyright (c) 2019 Tigera, Inc. All rights reserved.
> //
> // Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
> // you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
> // You may obtain a copy of the License at
> //
> // https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.apache.org_licenses_LICENSE-2D2.0&d=DwIBAg&c=5VD0RTtNlTh3ycd41b3MUw&r=DA8e1B5r073vIqRrFz7MRA&m=bsFf5gOsaXXCIBYvnl6AK78aRCaFS1zhqvVCYbn4JBA&s=5MVLZXPlXMo2B2K5wDP5P3Lmn4-TQTKHvQfvZupEFvs&e=
> //
> // Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
> // distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
> // WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
> // See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
> // limitations under the License.
>
> #include <stddef.h>
> #include <string.h>
> #include <linux/bpf.h>
> #include <linux/if_ether.h>
> #include <linux/if_packet.h>
> #include <linux/ip.h>
> #include <linux/ipv6.h>
> #include <linux/in.h>
> #include <linux/udp.h>
> #include <linux/tcp.h>
> #include <linux/pkt_cls.h>
> #include <sys/socket.h>
> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> #include <bpf/bpf_endian.h>
>
> #include <stddef.h>
>
> #define INLINE inline __attribute__((always_inline))
>
> #define skb_shorter(skb, len) ((void *)(long)(skb)->data + (len) > (void *)(long)skb->data_end)
>
> #define ETH_IPV4_UDP_SIZE (14+20+8)
>
> static INLINE struct iphdr *get_iphdr (struct __sk_buff *skb)
> {
> struct iphdr *ip = NULL;
> struct ethhdr *eth;
>
> if (skb_shorter(skb, ETH_IPV4_UDP_SIZE))
> goto out;
>
> eth = (void *)(long)skb->data;
> ip = (void *)(eth + 1);
>
> out:
> return ip;
> }
>
> int my_prog(struct __sk_buff *skb)
> {
> struct iphdr *ip = NULL;
> struct udphdr *udp;
> __u8 proto = 0;
>
> if (!(ip = get_iphdr(skb)))
> goto out;
>
> proto = ip->protocol;
>
> if (proto != IPPROTO_UDP)
> goto out;
>
> udp = (void*)(ip + 1);
>
> if (udp->dest != 1234)
> goto out;
>
> if (!udp)
> goto out;
>
> return udp->dest;
>
> out:
> return -1;
> }
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-08-10 17:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-08-07 17:30 [RFC] bpf: verifier check for dead branch Jiri Olsa
2020-08-10 1:21 ` Yonghong Song
2020-08-10 13:54 ` Jiri Olsa
2020-08-10 17:16 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2020-08-11 7:14 ` Jiri Olsa
2020-08-11 16:08 ` Yonghong Song
2020-08-12 7:48 ` Jiri Olsa
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=e4abe45b-2c80-9448-677c-e352f0ecb24e@fb.com \
--to=yhs@fb.com \
--cc=andriin@fb.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@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.