BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] bpf: Prepare prog_test_struct kfuncs for runtime tests
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 01:16:52 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220511194654.765705-3-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220511194654.765705-1-memxor@gmail.com>

In an effort to actually test the refcounting logic at runtime, add a
refcount_t member to prog_test_ref_kfunc and use it in selftests to
verify and test the whole logic more exhaustively.

The kfunc calls for prog_test_member do not require runtime refcounting,
as they are only used for verifier selftests, not during runtime
execution. Hence, their implementation now has a WARN_ON_ONCE as it is
not meant to be reachable code at runtime. It is strictly used in tests
triggering failure cases in the verifier. bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release is
called from map free path, since prog_test_member is embedded in map
value for some verifier tests, so we skip WARN_ON_ONCE for it.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
 net/bpf/test_run.c                            | 23 ++++++++++++++-----
 .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c |  4 ++--
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c
index 7a1579c91432..4d08cca771c7 100644
--- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
+++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
@@ -564,31 +564,36 @@ struct prog_test_ref_kfunc {
 	int b;
 	struct prog_test_member memb;
 	struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *next;
+	refcount_t cnt;
 };
 
 static struct prog_test_ref_kfunc prog_test_struct = {
 	.a = 42,
 	.b = 108,
 	.next = &prog_test_struct,
+	.cnt = REFCOUNT_INIT(1),
 };
 
 noinline struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *
 bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire(unsigned long *scalar_ptr)
 {
-	/* randomly return NULL */
-	if (get_jiffies_64() % 2)
-		return NULL;
+	refcount_inc(&prog_test_struct.cnt);
 	return &prog_test_struct;
 }
 
 noinline struct prog_test_member *
 bpf_kfunc_call_memb_acquire(void)
 {
-	return &prog_test_struct.memb;
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
+	return NULL;
 }
 
 noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_test_release(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p)
 {
+	if (!p)
+		return;
+
+	refcount_dec(&p->cnt);
 }
 
 noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release(struct prog_test_member *p)
@@ -597,12 +602,18 @@ noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb_release(struct prog_test_member *p)
 
 noinline void bpf_kfunc_call_memb1_release(struct prog_test_member1 *p)
 {
+	WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
 }
 
 noinline struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *
-bpf_kfunc_call_test_kptr_get(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc **p, int a, int b)
+bpf_kfunc_call_test_kptr_get(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc **pp, int a, int b)
 {
-	return &prog_test_struct;
+	struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p = READ_ONCE(*pp);
+
+	if (!p)
+		return NULL;
+	refcount_inc(&p->cnt);
+	return p;
 }
 
 struct prog_test_pass1 {
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
index 9113834640e6..6914904344c0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
@@ -212,13 +212,13 @@
 	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
 	BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
 	BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
-	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 24),
+	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 32),
 	BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
 	},
 	.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 	.fixup_map_kptr = { 1 },
 	.result = REJECT,
-	.errstr = "access beyond struct prog_test_ref_kfunc at off 24 size 8",
+	.errstr = "access beyond struct prog_test_ref_kfunc at off 32 size 8",
 },
 {
 	"map_kptr: unref: inherit PTR_UNTRUSTED on struct walk",
-- 
2.35.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-11 19:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-11 19:46 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] Follow ups for kptr series Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-05-11 19:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/4] bpf: Fix sparse warning for bpf_kptr_xchg_proto Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-05-11 19:46 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2022-05-11 19:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/4] selftests/bpf: Add negative C tests for kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-05-12  3:08   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-05-12 23:58     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-05-13  0:10       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-05-11 19:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add tests for kptr_ref refcounting Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-05-12  0:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] Follow ups for kptr series patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20220511194654.765705-3-memxor@gmail.com \
    --to=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    /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