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>,
Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>,
Delyan Kratunov <delyank@fb.com>
Subject: [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 11/32] bpf: Support constant scalar arguments for kfuncs
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2022 22:41:24 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220904204145.3089-12-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220904204145.3089-1-memxor@gmail.com>
Allow passing known constant scalars as arguments to kfuncs that do not
represent a size parameter. This makes the search pruning optimization
of verifier more conservative for such kfunc calls, and each
non-distinct argument is considered unequivalent.
We will use this support to then expose a global bpf_kptr_alloc function
where it takes the local type ID in program BTF, and returns a
PTR_TO_BTF_ID to the local type. These will be called local kptrs, and
allows programs to allocate their own objects.
However, this is still not completely safe, as mark_chain_precision
logic is buggy without more work when the constant argument is not a
size, but still needs precise marker propagation for pruning checks.
Next patch will fix this problem.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst | 30 ++++++++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst b/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst
index 781731749e55..31625393204a 100644
--- a/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst
+++ b/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst
@@ -72,6 +72,36 @@ argument as its size. By default, without __sz annotation, the size of the type
of the pointer is used. Without __sz annotation, a kfunc cannot accept a void
pointer.
+2.2.1 __k Annotation
+--------------------
+
+This annotation is only understood for scalar arguments, where it indicates that
+the verifier must check the scalar argument to be a known constant, which does
+not indicate a size parameter. This distinction is important, as when the scalar
+argument does not represent a size parameter, verifier is more conservative in
+state search pruning and does not consider two arguments equivalent for safety
+purposes if the already verified value was within range of the new one.
+
+This assumption holds well for sizes (as memory accessed within smaller bounds
+in old verified state will also work for bigger bounds in current to be explored
+state), but not for other constant arguments where each carries a distinct
+semantic effect.
+
+An example is given below::
+
+ void *bpf_mem_alloc(u32 local_type_id__k)
+ {
+ ...
+ }
+
+Here, bpf_mem_alloc uses local_type_id argument to find out the size of that
+type ID in program's BTF and return a sized pointer to it. Each type ID will
+have a distinct size, hence it is crucial to treat each such call as distinct
+when values don't match.
+
+Hence, whenever a constant scalar argument is accepted by a kfunc which is not a
+size parameter, __k suffix must be used.
+
.. _BPF_kfunc_nodef:
2.3 Using an existing kernel function
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 96fab14eb94e..b28e88d6fabd 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7588,6 +7588,10 @@ struct bpf_kfunc_arg_meta {
/* Out parameters */
u32 ref_obj_id;
u8 release_regno;
+ struct {
+ u64 value;
+ bool found;
+ } arg_constant;
};
static bool is_kfunc_acquire(struct bpf_kfunc_arg_meta *meta)
@@ -7625,30 +7629,40 @@ static bool is_kfunc_arg_kptr_get(struct bpf_kfunc_arg_meta *meta, int arg)
return arg == 0 && (meta->kfunc_flags & KF_KPTR_GET);
}
-static bool is_kfunc_arg_mem_size(const struct btf *btf,
- const struct btf_param *arg,
- const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
+static bool __kfunc_param_match_suffix(const struct btf *btf,
+ const struct btf_param *arg,
+ const char *suffix)
{
- int len, sfx_len = sizeof("__sz") - 1;
- const struct btf_type *t;
+ int suffix_len = strlen(suffix), len;
const char *param_name;
- t = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, arg->type, NULL);
- if (!btf_type_is_scalar(t) || reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE)
- return false;
-
/* In the future, this can be ported to use BTF tagging */
param_name = btf_name_by_offset(btf, arg->name_off);
if (str_is_empty(param_name))
return false;
len = strlen(param_name);
- if (len < sfx_len)
+ if (len < suffix_len)
return false;
- param_name += len - sfx_len;
- if (strncmp(param_name, "__sz", sfx_len))
+ param_name += len - suffix_len;
+ return !strncmp(param_name, suffix, suffix_len);
+}
+
+static bool is_kfunc_arg_mem_size(const struct btf *btf,
+ const struct btf_param *arg,
+ const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
+{
+ const struct btf_type *t;
+
+ t = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, arg->type, NULL);
+ if (!btf_type_is_scalar(t) || reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE)
return false;
- return true;
+ return __kfunc_param_match_suffix(btf, arg, "__sz");
+}
+
+static bool is_kfunc_arg_sfx_constant(const struct btf *btf, const struct btf_param *arg)
+{
+ return __kfunc_param_match_suffix(btf, arg, "__k");
}
/* Returns true if struct is composed of scalars, 4 levels of nesting allowed */
@@ -7873,10 +7887,29 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_arg_m
t = btf_type_skip_modifiers(btf, args[i].type, NULL);
if (btf_type_is_scalar(t)) {
- if (reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE)
- continue;
- verbose(env, "R%d is not a scalar\n", regno);
- return -EINVAL;
+ if (reg->type != SCALAR_VALUE) {
+ verbose(env, "R%d is not a scalar\n", regno);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ if (is_kfunc_arg_sfx_constant(meta->btf, &args[i])) {
+ /* kfunc is already bpf_capable() only, no need
+ * to check it here.
+ */
+ if (meta->arg_constant.found) {
+ verbose(env, "verifier internal error: only one constant argument permitted\n");
+ return -EFAULT;
+ }
+ if (!tnum_is_const(reg->var_off)) {
+ verbose(env, "R%d must be a known constant\n", regno);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ ret = mark_chain_precision(env, regno);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ return ret;
+ meta->arg_constant.found = true;
+ meta->arg_constant.value = reg->var_off.value;
+ }
+ continue;
}
if (!btf_type_is_ptr(t)) {
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-04 20:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 82+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-04 20:41 [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 00/32] Local kptrs, BPF linked lists Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 01/32] bpf: Add copy_map_value_long to copy to remote percpu memory Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 02/32] bpf: Support kptrs in percpu arraymap Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 03/32] bpf: Add zero_map_value to zero map value with special fields Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 04/32] bpf: Support kptrs in percpu hashmap and percpu LRU hashmap Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 05/32] bpf: Support kptrs in local storage maps Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-07 19:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 2:47 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 5:27 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-09-09 11:22 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 06/32] bpf: Annotate data races in bpf_local_storage Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 07/32] bpf: Allow specifying volatile type modifier for kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 08/32] bpf: Add comment about kptr's PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE handling Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 09/32] bpf: Rewrite kfunc argument handling Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 10/32] bpf: Drop kfunc support from btf_check_func_arg_match Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 12/32] bpf: Teach verifier about non-size constant arguments Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-07 22:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 2:49 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 13/32] bpf: Introduce bpf_list_head support for BPF maps Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-07 22:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 2:58 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 14/32] bpf: Introduce bpf_kptr_alloc helper Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-07 23:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 3:01 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 15/32] bpf: Add helper macro bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-07 23:48 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 16/32] bpf: Introduce BPF memory object model Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 0:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 2:39 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 3:37 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 11:50 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 14:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 14:45 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 15:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 15:37 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 15:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 17/32] bpf: Support bpf_list_node in local kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 18/32] bpf: Support bpf_spin_lock " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 0:35 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 8:25 ` Dave Marchevsky
2022-09-09 11:20 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 14:26 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 19/32] bpf: Support bpf_list_head " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 20/32] bpf: Introduce bpf_kptr_free helper Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 21/32] bpf: Allow locking bpf_spin_lock global variables Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 0:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 0:39 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 0:55 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 1:00 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 1:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-08 1:15 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-08 2:39 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 8:13 ` Dave Marchevsky
2022-09-09 11:05 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 14:24 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 14:50 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 14:58 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 18:32 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-09-09 19:25 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 20:21 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-09-09 20:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-10 0:21 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-09-11 22:31 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-20 20:55 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-10-18 4:06 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-09-09 22:30 ` Dave Marchevsky
2022-09-09 22:49 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 22:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-09 23:04 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-09 22:51 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 22/32] bpf: Bump BTF_KFUNC_SET_MAX_CNT Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 23/32] bpf: Add single ownership BPF linked list API Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 24/32] bpf: Permit NULL checking pointer with non-zero fixed offset Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 25/32] bpf: Allow storing local kptrs in BPF maps Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 26/32] bpf: Wire up freeing of bpf_list_heads in maps Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 27/32] bpf: Add destructor for bpf_list_head in local kptr Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 28/32] bpf: Remove duplicate PTR_TO_BTF_ID RO check Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 29/32] libbpf: Add support for private BSS map section Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 30/32] selftests/bpf: Add BTF tag macros for local kptrs, BPF linked lists Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 31/32] selftests/bpf: Add BPF linked list API tests Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-09-04 20:41 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 32/32] selftests/bpf: Add referenced local kptr tests Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=20220904204145.3089-12-memxor@gmail.com \
--to=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davemarchevsky@fb.com \
--cc=delyank@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