From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, kernel-team@fb.com, yhs@fb.com
Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/2] propagate nullness information for reg to reg comparisons
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 12:43:10 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220822094312.175448-1-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi Everyone,
This patchset adds ability to propagates nullness information for
branches of register to register equality compare instructions. The
following rules are used:
- suppose register A maybe null
- suppose register B is not null
- for JNE A, B, ... - A is not null in the false branch
- for JEQ A, B, ... - A is not null in the true branch
E.g. for program like below:
r6 = skb->sk;
r7 = sk_fullsock(r6);
r0 = sk_fullsock(r6);
if (r0 == 0) return 0; (a)
if (r0 != r7) return 0; (b)
*r7->type; (c)
return 0;
It is safe to dereference r7 at point (c), because of (a) and (b).
The utility of this change came up while working on BPF CLang backend
issue [1]. Specifically, while debugging issue with selftest
`test_sk_lookup.c`. This test has the following structure:
int access_ctx_sk(struct bpf_sk_lookup *ctx __CTX__)
{
struct bpf_sock *sk1 = NULL, *sk2 = NULL;
...
sk1 = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&redir_map, &KEY_SERVER_A);
if (!sk1) // (a)
goto out;
...
if (ctx->sk != sk1) // (b)
goto out;
...
if (ctx->sk->family != AF_INET || // (c)
ctx->sk->type != SOCK_STREAM ||
ctx->sk->state != BPF_TCP_LISTEN)
goto out;
...
}
- at (a) `sk1` is checked to be not null;
- at (b) `ctx->sk` is verified to be equal to `sk1`;
- at (c) `ctx->sk` is accessed w/o nullness check.
Currently Global Value Numbering pass considers expressions `sk1` and
`ctx->sk` to be identical at point (c) and replaces `ctx->sk` with
`sk1` (not expressions themselves but corresponding SSA values).
Since `sk1` is known to be not null after (b) verifier allows
execution of the program.
However, such optimization is not guaranteed to happen. When it does
not happen verifier reports an error.
[1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D131633#3722231
Thanks,
Eduard
Eduard Zingerman (2):
bpf: propagate nullness information for reg to reg comparisons
selftests/bpf: check nullness propagation for reg to reg comparisons
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 39 +++-
.../bpf/verifier/jeq_infer_not_null.c | 186 ++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 224 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jeq_infer_not_null.c
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
--
2.37.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-08-22 9:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-08-22 9:43 Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2022-08-22 9:43 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 1/2] bpf: propagate nullness information for reg to reg comparisons Eduard Zingerman
2022-08-23 23:15 ` John Fastabend
2022-08-24 22:05 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-08-25 6:21 ` John Fastabend
2022-08-25 22:31 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-08-25 2:55 ` Yonghong Song
2022-08-25 6:19 ` John Fastabend
2022-08-25 2:34 ` Yonghong Song
2022-08-22 9:43 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: check nullness propagation " Eduard Zingerman
2022-08-25 2:38 ` Yonghong Song
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=20220822094312.175448-1-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.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