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 15/32] bpf: Add helper macro bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate
Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2022 22:41:28 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220904204145.3089-16-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220904204145.3089-1-memxor@gmail.com>
For a lot of use cases in future patches, we will want to modify the
state of registers part of some same 'group' (e.g. same ref_obj_id). It
won't just be limited to releasing reference state, but setting a type
flag dynamically based on certain actions, etc.
Hence, we need a way to easily pass a callback to the function that
iterates over all registers in current bpf_verifier_state in all frames
upto (and including) the curframe.
While in C++ we would be able to easily use a lambda to pass state and
the callback together, sadly we aren't using C++ in the kernel. The next
best thing to avoid defining a function for each case seems like
statement expressions in GNU C. The kernel already uses them heavily,
hence they can passed to the macro in the style of a lambda. The
statement expression will then be substituted in the for loop bodies.
Variables __state and __reg are set to current bpf_func_state and reg
for each invocation of the expression inside the passed in verifier
state.
Then, convert mark_ptr_or_null_regs, clear_all_pkt_pointers,
release_reference, find_good_pkt_pointers, find_equal_scalars to
use bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 21 ++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 135 ++++++++---------------------------
2 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 107 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index c6d550978d63..73d9443d0074 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -354,6 +354,27 @@ struct bpf_verifier_state {
iter < frame->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; \
iter++, reg = bpf_get_spilled_reg(iter, frame))
+/* Invoke __expr over regsiters in __vst, setting __state and __reg */
+#define bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(__vst, __state, __reg, __expr) \
+ ({ \
+ struct bpf_verifier_state *___vstate = __vst; \
+ int ___i, ___j; \
+ for (___i = 0; ___i <= ___vstate->curframe; ___i++) { \
+ struct bpf_reg_state *___regs; \
+ __state = ___vstate->frame[___i]; \
+ ___regs = __state->regs; \
+ for (___j = 0; ___j < MAX_BPF_REG; ___j++) { \
+ __reg = &___regs[___j]; \
+ (void)(__expr); \
+ } \
+ bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(___j, __state, __reg) { \
+ if (!__reg) \
+ continue; \
+ (void)(__expr); \
+ } \
+ } \
+ })
+
/* linked list of verifier states used to prune search */
struct bpf_verifier_state_list {
struct bpf_verifier_state state;
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 8f28aa7f1e8d..817131537adb 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -6546,31 +6546,15 @@ static int check_func_proto(const struct bpf_func_proto *fn, int func_id)
/* Packet data might have moved, any old PTR_TO_PACKET[_META,_END]
* are now invalid, so turn them into unknown SCALAR_VALUE.
*/
-static void __clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_func_state *state)
+static void clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++)
- if (reg_is_pkt_pointer_any(®s[i]))
- mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, i);
+ struct bpf_func_state *state;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
- bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(i, state, reg) {
- if (!reg)
- continue;
+ bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(env->cur_state, state, reg, ({
if (reg_is_pkt_pointer_any(reg))
__mark_reg_unknown(env, reg);
- }
-}
-
-static void clear_all_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
-{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++)
- __clear_all_pkt_pointers(env, vstate->frame[i]);
+ }));
}
enum {
@@ -6599,41 +6583,24 @@ static void mark_pkt_end(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate, int regn, bool range
reg->range = AT_PKT_END;
}
-static void release_reg_references(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
- struct bpf_func_state *state,
- int ref_obj_id)
-{
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++)
- if (regs[i].ref_obj_id == ref_obj_id)
- mark_reg_unknown(env, regs, i);
-
- bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(i, state, reg) {
- if (!reg)
- continue;
- if (reg->ref_obj_id == ref_obj_id)
- __mark_reg_unknown(env, reg);
- }
-}
-
/* The pointer with the specified id has released its reference to kernel
* resources. Identify all copies of the same pointer and clear the reference.
*/
static int release_reference(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
int ref_obj_id)
{
- struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate = env->cur_state;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
int err;
- int i;
err = release_reference_state(cur_func(env), ref_obj_id);
if (err)
return err;
- for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++)
- release_reg_references(env, vstate->frame[i], ref_obj_id);
+ bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(env->cur_state, state, reg, ({
+ if (reg->ref_obj_id == ref_obj_id)
+ __mark_reg_unknown(env, reg);
+ }));
return 0;
}
@@ -9844,34 +9811,14 @@ static int check_alu_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn)
return 0;
}
-static void __find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_func_state *state,
- struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg,
- enum bpf_reg_type type, int new_range)
-{
- struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++) {
- reg = &state->regs[i];
- if (reg->type == type && reg->id == dst_reg->id)
- /* keep the maximum range already checked */
- reg->range = max(reg->range, new_range);
- }
-
- bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(i, state, reg) {
- if (!reg)
- continue;
- if (reg->type == type && reg->id == dst_reg->id)
- reg->range = max(reg->range, new_range);
- }
-}
-
static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg,
enum bpf_reg_type type,
bool range_right_open)
{
- int new_range, i;
+ struct bpf_func_state *state;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
+ int new_range;
if (dst_reg->off < 0 ||
(dst_reg->off == 0 && range_right_open))
@@ -9936,9 +9883,11 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
* the range won't allow anything.
* dst_reg->off is known < MAX_PACKET_OFF, therefore it fits in a u16.
*/
- for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++)
- __find_good_pkt_pointers(vstate->frame[i], dst_reg, type,
- new_range);
+ bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(vstate, state, reg, ({
+ if (reg->type == type && reg->id == dst_reg->id)
+ /* keep the maximum range already checked */
+ reg->range = max(reg->range, new_range);
+ }));
}
static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 val, u8 opcode)
@@ -10427,7 +10376,7 @@ static void mark_ptr_or_null_reg(struct bpf_func_state *state,
if (!reg_may_point_to_spin_lock(reg)) {
/* For not-NULL ptr, reg->ref_obj_id will be reset
- * in release_reg_references().
+ * in release_reference().
*
* reg->id is still used by spin_lock ptr. Other
* than spin_lock ptr type, reg->id can be reset.
@@ -10437,22 +10386,6 @@ static void mark_ptr_or_null_reg(struct bpf_func_state *state,
}
}
-static void __mark_ptr_or_null_regs(struct bpf_func_state *state, u32 id,
- bool is_null)
-{
- struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
- int i;
-
- for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_REG; i++)
- mark_ptr_or_null_reg(state, &state->regs[i], id, is_null);
-
- bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(i, state, reg) {
- if (!reg)
- continue;
- mark_ptr_or_null_reg(state, reg, id, is_null);
- }
-}
-
/* The logic is similar to find_good_pkt_pointers(), both could eventually
* be folded together at some point.
*/
@@ -10460,10 +10393,9 @@ static void mark_ptr_or_null_regs(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate, u32 regno,
bool is_null)
{
struct bpf_func_state *state = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe];
- struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = state->regs, *reg;
u32 ref_obj_id = regs[regno].ref_obj_id;
u32 id = regs[regno].id;
- int i;
if (ref_obj_id && ref_obj_id == id && is_null)
/* regs[regno] is in the " == NULL" branch.
@@ -10472,8 +10404,9 @@ static void mark_ptr_or_null_regs(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate, u32 regno,
*/
WARN_ON_ONCE(release_reference_state(state, id));
- for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++)
- __mark_ptr_or_null_regs(vstate->frame[i], id, is_null);
+ bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(vstate, state, reg, ({
+ mark_ptr_or_null_reg(state, reg, id, is_null);
+ }));
}
static bool try_match_pkt_pointers(const struct bpf_insn *insn,
@@ -10586,23 +10519,11 @@ static void find_equal_scalars(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
{
struct bpf_func_state *state;
struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
- int i, j;
- for (i = 0; i <= vstate->curframe; i++) {
- state = vstate->frame[i];
- for (j = 0; j < MAX_BPF_REG; j++) {
- reg = &state->regs[j];
- if (reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->id == known_reg->id)
- *reg = *known_reg;
- }
-
- bpf_for_each_spilled_reg(j, state, reg) {
- if (!reg)
- continue;
- if (reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->id == known_reg->id)
- *reg = *known_reg;
- }
- }
+ bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate(vstate, state, reg, ({
+ if (reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE && reg->id == known_reg->id)
+ *reg = *known_reg;
+ }));
}
static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
--
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 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 11/32] bpf: Support constant scalar arguments for kfuncs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2022-09-07 23:48 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next v1 15/32] bpf: Add helper macro bpf_expr_for_each_reg_in_vstate 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=20220904204145.3089-16-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