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
next prev 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).