public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 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>,
	Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>,
	Delyan Kratunov <delyank@fb.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v1 17/25] bpf: Support constant scalar arguments for kfuncs
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 06:52:32 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221011012240.3149-18-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221011012240.3149-1-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        | 59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
 2 files changed, 75 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst b/Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst
index 0f858156371d..08f9a968d06d 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 a69ce6e29f40..4583a22777fe 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7676,6 +7676,10 @@ struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta {
 	u8 release_regno;
 	bool r0_rdonly;
 	u64 r0_size;
+	struct {
+		u64 value;
+		bool found;
+	} arg_constant;
 };
 
 static bool is_kfunc_acquire(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
@@ -7713,30 +7717,40 @@ static bool is_kfunc_arg_kptr_get(struct bpf_kfunc_call_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");
 }
 
 static bool is_kfunc_arg_ret_buf_size(const struct btf *btf,
@@ -8013,7 +8027,24 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
 				verbose(env, "R%d is not a scalar\n", regno);
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
-			if (is_kfunc_arg_ret_buf_size(btf, &args[i], reg, "rdonly_buf_size")) {
+			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;
+			} else if (is_kfunc_arg_ret_buf_size(btf, &args[i], reg, "rdonly_buf_size")) {
 					meta->r0_rdonly = true;
 					is_ret_buf_sz = true;
 			} else if (is_kfunc_arg_ret_buf_size(btf, &args[i], reg, "rdwr_buf_size")) {
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-10-11  1:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-10-11  1:22 [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/25] Local kptrs, BPF linked lists Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 01/25] bpf: Document UAPI details for special BPF types Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 02/25] bpf: Allow specifying volatile type modifier for kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 03/25] bpf: Clobber stack slot when writing over spilled PTR_TO_BTF_ID Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 04/25] bpf: Fix slot type check in check_stack_write_var_off Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 05/25] bpf: Drop reg_type_may_be_refcounted_or_null Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 06/25] bpf: Refactor kptr_off_tab into fields_tab Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 07/25] bpf: Consolidate spin_lock, timer management " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 08/25] bpf: Refactor map->off_arr handling Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 09/25] bpf: Support bpf_list_head in map values Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 10/25] bpf: Introduce local kptrs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 11/25] bpf: Recognize bpf_{spin_lock,list_head,list_node} in " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/25] bpf: Verify ownership relationships for owning types Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 13/25] bpf: Support locking bpf_spin_lock in local kptr Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 14/25] bpf: Allow locking bpf_spin_lock global variables Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 15/25] bpf: Rewrite kfunc argument handling Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 16/25] bpf: Drop kfunc bits from btf_check_func_arg_match Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 18/25] bpf: Teach verifier about non-size constant arguments Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 19/25] bpf: Introduce bpf_kptr_new Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 20/25] bpf: Introduce bpf_kptr_drop Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 21/25] bpf: Permit NULL checking pointer with non-zero fixed offset Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 22/25] bpf: Introduce single ownership BPF linked list API Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 23/25] libbpf: Add support for private BSS map section Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 24/25] selftests/bpf: Add __contains macro to bpf_experimental.h Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 25/25] selftests/bpf: Add BPF linked list API tests Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-10-11  1:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 00/25] Local kptrs, BPF linked lists 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=20221011012240.3149-18-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