bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
To: alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	oss-drivers@netronome.com, Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 10/19] bpf: randomize high 32-bit when BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 is set
Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 20:50:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1554925833-7333-11-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1554925833-7333-1-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com>

This patch randomizes high 32-bit of a definition when BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32
is set.

It does this once the flag set no matter there is hardware zero extension
support or not. Because this is a test feature and we want to deliver the
most stressful test.

Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 85 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
 1 file changed, 68 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 9141a9a..33407c5 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7520,24 +7520,70 @@ static int opt_remove_nops(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-static int opt_subreg_zext_lo32(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+static int opt_subreg_zext_lo32_rnd_hi32(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+					 const union bpf_attr *attr)
 {
 	struct bpf_insn_aux_data orig_aux, *aux = env->insn_aux_data;
+	struct bpf_insn *patch, zext_patch[3], rnd_hi32_patch[4];
+	int i, patch_len, delta = 0, len = env->prog->len;
 	struct bpf_insn *insns = env->prog->insnsi;
-	int i, delta = 0, len = env->prog->len;
-	struct bpf_insn zext_patch[3];
 	struct bpf_prog *new_prog;
+	bool rnd_hi32;
+
+	rnd_hi32 = attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32;
 
 	zext_patch[1] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, 0, 32);
 	zext_patch[2] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, 0, 32);
+	rnd_hi32_patch[1] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_AX, 0);
+	rnd_hi32_patch[2] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, BPF_REG_AX, 32);
+	rnd_hi32_patch[3] = BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_OR, 0, BPF_REG_AX);
 	for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
 		int adj_idx = i + delta;
 		struct bpf_insn insn;
 
-		if (!aux[adj_idx].zext_dst)
+		insn = insns[adj_idx];
+		if (!aux[adj_idx].zext_dst) {
+			u8 code, class;
+			u32 imm_rnd;
+
+			if (!rnd_hi32)
+				continue;
+
+			code = insn.code;
+			class = BPF_CLASS(code);
+			/* Insns doesn't define any value. */
+			if (class == BPF_JMP || class == BPF_JMP32 ||
+			    class == BPF_STX || class == BPF_ST)
+				continue;
+
+			/* NOTE: arg "reg" is only used for BPF_STX, as it has
+			 *       been ruled out in above check, it is safe to
+			 *       pass NULL here.
+			 */
+			if (is_reg64(env, &insn, insn.dst_reg, NULL, DST_OP)) {
+				if (class == BPF_LD &&
+				    BPF_MODE(code) == BPF_IMM)
+					i++;
+				continue;
+			}
+
+			/* ctx load could be transformed into wider load. */
+			if (class == BPF_LDX &&
+			    aux[adj_idx].ptr_type == PTR_TO_CTX)
+				continue;
+
+			imm_rnd = get_random_int();
+			rnd_hi32_patch[0] = insns[adj_idx];
+			rnd_hi32_patch[1].imm = imm_rnd;
+			rnd_hi32_patch[3].dst_reg = insn.dst_reg;
+			patch = rnd_hi32_patch;
+			patch_len = 4;
+			goto apply_patch_buffer;
+		}
+
+		if (bpf_jit_hardware_zext())
 			continue;
 
-		insn = insns[adj_idx];
 		/* "adjust_insn_aux_data" only retains the original insn aux
 		 * data if insn at patched offset is at the end of the patch
 		 * buffer. That is to say, given the following insn sequence:
@@ -7580,15 +7626,18 @@ static int opt_subreg_zext_lo32(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
 		zext_patch[0] = insns[adj_idx];
 		zext_patch[1].dst_reg = insn.dst_reg;
 		zext_patch[2].dst_reg = insn.dst_reg;
+		patch = zext_patch;
+		patch_len = 3;
+apply_patch_buffer:
 		memcpy(&orig_aux, &aux[adj_idx], sizeof(orig_aux));
-		new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, adj_idx, zext_patch, 3);
+		new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, adj_idx, patch, patch_len);
 		if (!new_prog)
 			return -ENOMEM;
 		env->prog = new_prog;
 		insns = new_prog->insnsi;
 		aux = env->insn_aux_data;
 		memcpy(&aux[adj_idx], &orig_aux, sizeof(orig_aux));
-		delta += 2;
+		delta += patch_len - 1;
 	}
 
 	return 0;
@@ -8425,16 +8474,18 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr,
 	if (ret == 0)
 		ret = check_max_stack_depth(env);
 
-	/* Instruction rewrites happen after this point.
-	 * For offload target, finalize hook has all aux insn info, do any
-	 * customized work there.
-	 */
-	if (ret == 0 && !bpf_jit_hardware_zext() &&
-	    !bpf_prog_is_dev_bound(env->prog->aux)) {
-		ret = opt_subreg_zext_lo32(env);
-		env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext = !!ret;
-	} else {
-		env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext = true;
+	/* Instruction rewrites happen after this point. */
+	if (ret == 0) {
+		if (bpf_prog_is_dev_bound(env->prog->aux)) {
+			/* For offload target, finalize hook has all aux insn
+			 * info, copy the analysis result at there.
+			 */
+			env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext = true;
+		} else {
+			ret = opt_subreg_zext_lo32_rnd_hi32(env, attr);
+			env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext =
+				bpf_jit_hardware_zext() ? true : !!ret;
+		}
 	}
 
 	if (is_priv) {
-- 
2.7.4


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-04-10 19:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-04-10 19:50 [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 00/19] bpf: eliminate zero extensions for sub-register writes Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 01/19] bpf: refactor propagate_liveness to eliminate duplicated for loop Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 02/19] bpf: refactor propagate_liveness to eliminate code redundance Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  2:39   ` [oss-drivers] " Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 03/19] bpf: factor out reg and stack slot propagation into "propagate_liveness_reg" Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  2:39   ` [oss-drivers] " Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 04/19] bpf: refactor "check_reg_arg" to eliminate code redundancy Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  2:40   ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 05/19] bpf: split read liveness into REG_LIVE_READ64 and REG_LIVE_READ32 Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  2:52   ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-11  6:13     ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-11 16:44       ` [oss-drivers] " Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-11 16:53         ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-12 16:14           ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-11 17:22         ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 06/19] bpf: mark lo32 writes that should be zero extended into hi32 Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  3:13   ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-11  6:02     ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 07/19] bpf: reduce false alarm by refining helper call arg types Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 08/19] bpf: insert explicit zero extension insn when hardware doesn't do it implicitly Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 09/19] bpf: introduce new bpf prog load flags "BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32" Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` Jiong Wang [this message]
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 11/19] libbpf: new global variable "libbpf_test_mode" Jiong Wang
2019-04-11  3:19   ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-04-11 14:32     ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-11 21:49       ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-12 22:08         ` Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 12/19] selftests: enable hi32 randomization for "test_progs" and "test_verifier" Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 13/19] arm: bpf: eliminate zero extension code-gen Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 14/19] powerpc: " Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 15/19] s390: " Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 16/19] sparc: " Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 17/19] x32: " Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 18/19] riscv: " Jiong Wang
2019-04-10 19:50 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 bpf-next 19/19] nfp: " Jiong Wang

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=1554925833-7333-11-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com \
    --to=jiong.wang@netronome.com \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oss-drivers@netronome.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).