BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] bpf: Track aligned st store as imprecise spilled registers
@ 2024-01-10  5:13 Yonghong Song
  2024-01-10  5:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a selftest with not-8-byte aligned BPF_ST Yonghong Song
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2024-01-10  5:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Andrii Nakryiko, Daniel Borkmann, kernel-team,
	Martin KaFai Lau, Kuniyuki Iwashima, Martin KaFai Lau

With patch set [1], precision backtracing supports register spill/fill
to/from the stack. The patch [2] allows initial imprecise register spill
with content 0. This is a common case for cpuv3 and lower for
initializing the stack variables with pattern
  r1 = 0
  *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1
and the [2] has demonstrated good verification improvement.

For cpuv4, the initialization could be
  *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 0
The current verifier marks the r10-8 contents with STACK_ZERO.
Similar to [2], let us permit the above insn to behave like
imprecise register spill which can reduce number of verified states.
The change is in function check_stack_write_fixed_off().

Before this patch, spilled zero will be marked as STACK_ZERO
which can provide precise values. In check_stack_write_var_off(),
STACK_ZERO will be maintained if writing a const zero
so later it can provide precise values if needed.

The above handling of '*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 0' as a spill
will have issues in check_stack_write_var_off() as the spill
will be converted to STACK_MISC and the precise value 0
is lost. To fix this issue, if the spill slots with const
zero and the BPF_ST write also with const zero, the spill slots
are preserved, which can later provide precise values
if needed. Without the change in check_stack_write_var_off(),
the test_verifier subtest 'BPF_ST_MEM stack imm zero, variable offset'
will fail.

I checked cpuv3 and cpuv4 with and without this patch with veristat.
There is no state change for cpuv3 since '*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 0'
is only generated with cpuv4.

For cpuv4:
$ ../veristat -C old.cpuv4.csv new.cpuv4.csv -e file,prog,insns,states -f 'insns_diff!=0'
File                                        Program              Insns (A)  Insns (B)  Insns    (DIFF)  States (A)  States (B)  States (DIFF)
------------------------------------------  -------------------  ---------  ---------  ---------------  ----------  ----------  -------------
local_storage_bench.bpf.linked3.o           get_local                  228        168    -60 (-26.32%)          17          14   -3 (-17.65%)
pyperf600_bpf_loop.bpf.linked3.o            on_event                  6066       4889  -1177 (-19.40%)         403         321  -82 (-20.35%)
test_cls_redirect.bpf.linked3.o             cls_redirect             35483      35387     -96 (-0.27%)        2179        2177    -2 (-0.09%)
test_l4lb_noinline.bpf.linked3.o            balancer_ingress          4494       4522     +28 (+0.62%)         217         219    +2 (+0.92%)
test_l4lb_noinline_dynptr.bpf.linked3.o     balancer_ingress          1432       1455     +23 (+1.61%)          92          94    +2 (+2.17%)
test_xdp_noinline.bpf.linked3.o             balancer_ingress_v6       3462       3458      -4 (-0.12%)         216         216    +0 (+0.00%)
verifier_iterating_callbacks.bpf.linked3.o  widening                    52         41    -11 (-21.15%)           4           3   -1 (-25.00%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o             syncookie_tc             12412      11719    -693 (-5.58%)         345         330   -15 (-4.35%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o             syncookie_xdp            12478      11794    -684 (-5.48%)         346         331   -15 (-4.34%)

test_l4lb_noinline and test_l4lb_noinline_dynptr has minor regression, but
pyperf600_bpf_loop and local_storage_bench gets pretty good improvement.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231205184248.1502704-1-andrii@kernel.org/
  [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20231205184248.1502704-9-andrii@kernel.org/

Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.com>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                           | 17 +++++++++++++++--
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c   | 16 ++++++++--------
 2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

Changelogs:
  v3 -> v4:
    - add missed SPILL slot check in check_stack_write_var_off().
    - remove incorrect comments in the new test.
  v2 -> v3:
    - add precision checking to the spilled zero value register in
      check_stack_write_var_off().
    - check spill slot-by-slot instead of in a bunch within a spi.
  v1 -> v2:
    - Preserve with-const-zero spill if writing is also zero
      in check_stack_write_var_off().
    - Add a test with not-8-byte-aligned BPF_ST store.

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index adbf330d364b..bd7d74a06f19 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -4493,7 +4493,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 		if (fls64(reg->umax_value) > BITS_PER_BYTE * size)
 			state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.id = 0;
 	} else if (!reg && !(off % BPF_REG_SIZE) && is_bpf_st_mem(insn) &&
-		   insn->imm != 0 && env->bpf_capable) {
+		   env->bpf_capable) {
 		struct bpf_reg_state fake_reg = {};
 
 		__mark_reg_known(&fake_reg, insn->imm);
@@ -4640,7 +4640,20 @@ static int check_stack_write_var_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 
-		/* Erase all spilled pointers. */
+		/* If writing_zero and the spi slot contains a spill of value 0,
+		 * maintain the spill type.
+		 */
+		if (writing_zero && *stype == STACK_SPILL &&
+		    is_spilled_scalar_reg(&state->stack[spi])) {
+			struct bpf_reg_state *spill_reg = &state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr;
+
+			if (tnum_is_const(spill_reg->var_off) && spill_reg->var_off.value == 0) {
+				zero_used = true;
+				continue;
+			}
+		}
+
+		/* Erase all other spilled pointers. */
 		state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.type = NOT_INIT;
 
 		/* Update the slot type. */
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c
index 39fe3372e0e0..d4b3188afe07 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c
@@ -495,14 +495,14 @@ char single_byte_buf[1] SEC(".data.single_byte_buf");
 SEC("raw_tp")
 __log_level(2)
 __success
-/* make sure fp-8 is all STACK_ZERO */
-__msg("2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0          ; R10=fp0 fp-8_w=00000000")
+/* fp-8 is spilled IMPRECISE value zero (represented by a zero value fake reg) */
+__msg("2: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0          ; R10=fp0 fp-8_w=0")
 /* but fp-16 is spilled IMPRECISE zero const reg */
 __msg("4: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r0        ; R0_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-16_w=0")
-/* validate that assigning R2 from STACK_ZERO doesn't mark register
+/* validate that assigning R2 from STACK_SPILL with zero value  doesn't mark register
  * precise immediately; if necessary, it will be marked precise later
  */
-__msg("6: (71) r2 = *(u8 *)(r10 -1)          ; R2_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=00000000")
+__msg("6: (71) r2 = *(u8 *)(r10 -1)          ; R2_w=0 R10=fp0 fp-8_w=0")
 /* similarly, when R2 is assigned from spilled register, it is initially
  * imprecise, but will be marked precise later once it is used in precise context
  */
@@ -520,14 +520,14 @@ __msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 3: (b7) r0 = 0")
 __naked void partial_stack_load_preserves_zeros(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
-		/* fp-8 is all STACK_ZERO */
+		/* fp-8 is value zero (represented by a zero value fake reg) */
 		".8byte %[fp8_st_zero];" /* LLVM-18+: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0; */
 
 		/* fp-16 is const zero register */
 		"r0 = 0;"
 		"*(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r0;"
 
-		/* load single U8 from non-aligned STACK_ZERO slot */
+		/* load single U8 from non-aligned spilled value zero slot */
 		"r1 = %[single_byte_buf];"
 		"r2 = *(u8 *)(r10 -1);"
 		"r1 += r2;"
@@ -539,7 +539,7 @@ __naked void partial_stack_load_preserves_zeros(void)
 		"r1 += r2;"
 		"*(u8 *)(r1 + 0) = r2;" /* this should be fine */
 
-		/* load single U16 from non-aligned STACK_ZERO slot */
+		/* load single U16 from non-aligned spilled value zero slot */
 		"r1 = %[single_byte_buf];"
 		"r2 = *(u16 *)(r10 -2);"
 		"r1 += r2;"
@@ -551,7 +551,7 @@ __naked void partial_stack_load_preserves_zeros(void)
 		"r1 += r2;"
 		"*(u8 *)(r1 + 0) = r2;" /* this should be fine */
 
-		/* load single U32 from non-aligned STACK_ZERO slot */
+		/* load single U32 from non-aligned spilled value zero slot */
 		"r1 = %[single_byte_buf];"
 		"r2 = *(u32 *)(r10 -4);"
 		"r1 += r2;"
-- 
2.34.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2024-01-12 20:30 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2024-01-10  5:13 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] bpf: Track aligned st store as imprecise spilled registers Yonghong Song
2024-01-10  5:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a selftest with not-8-byte aligned BPF_ST Yonghong Song
2024-01-10 17:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] bpf: Track aligned st store as imprecise spilled registers Kuniyuki Iwashima
2024-01-12 20:05 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-01-12 20:30 ` 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