* [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4
@ 2023-12-01 2:46 Yonghong Song
2023-12-01 23:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 0:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
0 siblings, 2 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2023-12-01 2:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Andrii Nakryiko, Daniel Borkmann, kernel-team,
Martin KaFai Lau
Bpf cpu=v4 support is introduced in [1] and Commit 4cd58e9af8b9
("bpf: Support new 32bit offset jmp instruction") added support for new
32bit offset jmp instruction. Unfortunately, in function
bpf_adj_delta_to_off(), for new branch insn with 32bit offset, the offset
(plus/minor a small delta) compares to 16-bit offset bound
[S16_MIN, S16_MAX], which caused the following verification failure:
$ ./test_progs-cpuv4 -t verif_scale_pyperf180
...
insn 10 cannot be patched due to 16-bit range
...
libbpf: failed to load object 'pyperf180.bpf.o'
scale_test:FAIL:expect_success unexpected error: -12 (errno 12)
#405 verif_scale_pyperf180:FAIL
Note that due to recent llvm18 development, the patch [2] (already applied
in bpf-next) needs to be applied to bpf tree for testing purpose.
The fix is rather simple. For 32bit offset branch insn, the adjusted
offset compares to [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] and then verification succeeded.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230728011143.3710005-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
[2] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231110193644.3130906-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Fixes: 4cd58e9af8b9 ("bpf: Support new 32bit offset jmp instruction")
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
kernel/bpf/core.c | 13 +++++++++----
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
Changelogs:
v2 -> v3:
- not doing init for off_min/off_max at decl time and rather do
it at 'off' assignment time to make code better.
v1 -> v2:
- Change off from s32 to s64 to capture overflow case
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index cd3afe57ece3..e76762b5ad28 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -371,14 +371,19 @@ static int bpf_adj_delta_to_imm(struct bpf_insn *insn, u32 pos, s32 end_old,
static int bpf_adj_delta_to_off(struct bpf_insn *insn, u32 pos, s32 end_old,
s32 end_new, s32 curr, const bool probe_pass)
{
- const s32 off_min = S16_MIN, off_max = S16_MAX;
+ s64 off_min, off_max;
s32 delta = end_new - end_old;
- s32 off;
+ s64 off;
- if (insn->code == (BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JA))
+ if (insn->code == (BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JA)) {
off = insn->imm;
- else
+ off_min = S32_MIN;
+ off_max = S32_MAX;
+ } else {
off = insn->off;
+ off_min = S16_MIN;
+ off_max = S16_MAX;
+ }
if (curr < pos && curr + off + 1 >= end_old)
off += delta;
--
2.34.1
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4
2023-12-01 2:46 [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4 Yonghong Song
@ 2023-12-01 23:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 0:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrii Nakryiko @ 2023-12-01 23:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yonghong Song
Cc: bpf, Alexei Starovoitov, Andrii Nakryiko, Daniel Borkmann,
kernel-team, Martin KaFai Lau
On Thu, Nov 30, 2023 at 6:47 PM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> Bpf cpu=v4 support is introduced in [1] and Commit 4cd58e9af8b9
> ("bpf: Support new 32bit offset jmp instruction") added support for new
> 32bit offset jmp instruction. Unfortunately, in function
> bpf_adj_delta_to_off(), for new branch insn with 32bit offset, the offset
> (plus/minor a small delta) compares to 16-bit offset bound
> [S16_MIN, S16_MAX], which caused the following verification failure:
> $ ./test_progs-cpuv4 -t verif_scale_pyperf180
> ...
> insn 10 cannot be patched due to 16-bit range
> ...
> libbpf: failed to load object 'pyperf180.bpf.o'
> scale_test:FAIL:expect_success unexpected error: -12 (errno 12)
> #405 verif_scale_pyperf180:FAIL
>
> Note that due to recent llvm18 development, the patch [2] (already applied
> in bpf-next) needs to be applied to bpf tree for testing purpose.
>
> The fix is rather simple. For 32bit offset branch insn, the adjusted
> offset compares to [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] and then verification succeeded.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230728011143.3710005-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231110193644.3130906-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
>
> Fixes: 4cd58e9af8b9 ("bpf: Support new 32bit offset jmp instruction")
> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/core.c | 13 +++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> Changelogs:
> v2 -> v3:
> - not doing init for off_min/off_max at decl time and rather do
> it at 'off' assignment time to make code better.
> v1 -> v2:
> - Change off from s32 to s64 to capture overflow case
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> index cd3afe57ece3..e76762b5ad28 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> @@ -371,14 +371,19 @@ static int bpf_adj_delta_to_imm(struct bpf_insn *insn, u32 pos, s32 end_old,
> static int bpf_adj_delta_to_off(struct bpf_insn *insn, u32 pos, s32 end_old,
> s32 end_new, s32 curr, const bool probe_pass)
> {
> - const s32 off_min = S16_MIN, off_max = S16_MAX;
> + s64 off_min, off_max;
> s32 delta = end_new - end_old;
> - s32 off;
> + s64 off;
I combined off declaration with off_min, off_max on the same line.
Pushed to bpf, thanks!
>
> - if (insn->code == (BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JA))
> + if (insn->code == (BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JA)) {
> off = insn->imm;
> - else
> + off_min = S32_MIN;
> + off_max = S32_MAX;
> + } else {
> off = insn->off;
> + off_min = S16_MIN;
> + off_max = S16_MAX;
> + }
>
> if (curr < pos && curr + off + 1 >= end_old)
> off += delta;
> --
> 2.34.1
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4
2023-12-01 2:46 [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4 Yonghong Song
2023-12-01 23:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
@ 2023-12-02 0:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
1 sibling, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2023-12-02 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yonghong Song; +Cc: bpf, ast, andrii, daniel, kernel-team, martin.lau
Hello:
This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (master)
by Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>:
On Thu, 30 Nov 2023 18:46:40 -0800 you wrote:
> Bpf cpu=v4 support is introduced in [1] and Commit 4cd58e9af8b9
> ("bpf: Support new 32bit offset jmp instruction") added support for new
> 32bit offset jmp instruction. Unfortunately, in function
> bpf_adj_delta_to_off(), for new branch insn with 32bit offset, the offset
> (plus/minor a small delta) compares to 16-bit offset bound
> [S16_MIN, S16_MAX], which caused the following verification failure:
> $ ./test_progs-cpuv4 -t verif_scale_pyperf180
> ...
> insn 10 cannot be patched due to 16-bit range
> ...
> libbpf: failed to load object 'pyperf180.bpf.o'
> scale_test:FAIL:expect_success unexpected error: -12 (errno 12)
> #405 verif_scale_pyperf180:FAIL
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [bpf,v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4
https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/dfce9cb31405
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2023-12-02 0:00 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2023-12-01 2:46 [PATCH bpf v3] bpf: Fix a verifier bug due to incorrect branch offset comparison with cpu=v4 Yonghong Song
2023-12-01 23:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 0:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox