From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com, song@kernel.org, iii@linux.ibm.com,
xukuohai@huawei.com, hffilwlqm@gmail.com,
kernel-patches-bot@fb.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 23:04:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230912150442.2009-3-hffilwlqm@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230912150442.2009-1-hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
From commit ebf7d1f508a73871 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall
handling in JIT"), the tailcall on x64 works better than before.
From commit e411901c0b775a3a ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms
for x64 JIT"), tailcall is able to run in BPF subprograms on x64.
From commit 5b92a28aae4dd0f8 ("bpf: Support attaching tracing BPF program
to other BPF programs"), BPF program is able to trace other BPF programs.
How about combining them all together?
1. FENTRY/FEXIT on a BPF subprogram.
2. A tailcall runs in the BPF subprogram.
3. The tailcall calls the subprogram's caller.
As a result, a tailcall infinite loop comes up. And the loop would halt
the machine.
As we know, in tail call context, the tail_call_cnt propagates by stack
and rax register between BPF subprograms. So do in trampolines.
Fixes: ebf7d1f508a7 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall handling in JIT")
Fixes: e411901c0b77 ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms for x64 JIT")
Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
---
arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++------
include/linux/bpf.h | 5 +++++
kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 4 ++--
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 3 +++
4 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index bcca1c9b9a027..2846c21d75bfa 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -1022,6 +1022,10 @@ static void emit_shiftx(u8 **pprog, u32 dst_reg, u8 src_reg, bool is64, u8 op)
#define INSN_SZ_DIFF (((addrs[i] - addrs[i - 1]) - (prog - temp)))
+/* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */
+#define RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack) \
+ EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85, -round_up(stack, 8) - 8)
+
static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image, u8 *rw_image,
int oldproglen, struct jit_context *ctx, bool jmp_padding)
{
@@ -1627,9 +1631,7 @@ st: if (is_imm8(insn->off))
func = (u8 *) __bpf_call_base + imm32;
if (tail_call_reachable) {
- /* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */
- EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85,
- -round_up(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth, 8) - 8);
+ RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth);
if (!imm32)
return -EINVAL;
offs = 7 + x86_call_depth_emit_accounting(&prog, func);
@@ -2404,6 +2406,7 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
* [ ... ]
* [ stack_arg2 ]
* RBP - arg_stack_off [ stack_arg1 ]
+ * RSP [ tail_call_cnt ] BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX
*/
/* room for return value of orig_call or fentry prog */
@@ -2468,6 +2471,8 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
else
/* sub rsp, stack_size */
EMIT4(0x48, 0x83, 0xEC, stack_size);
+ if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
+ EMIT1(0x50); /* push rax */
/* mov QWORD PTR [rbp - rbx_off], rbx */
emit_stx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, BPF_REG_6, -rbx_off);
@@ -2520,9 +2525,15 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
restore_regs(m, &prog, regs_off);
save_args(m, &prog, arg_stack_off, true);
+ if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
+ /* Before calling the original function, restore the
+ * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
+ */
+ RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
+
if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_ORIG_STACK) {
- emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
- EMIT2(0xff, 0xd0); /* call *rax */
+ emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
+ EMIT2(0xff, 0xd3); /* call *rbx */
} else {
/* call original function */
if (emit_rsb_call(&prog, orig_call, prog)) {
@@ -2573,7 +2584,12 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
ret = -EINVAL;
goto cleanup;
}
- }
+ } else if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
+ /* Before running the original function, restore the
+ * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
+ */
+ RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
+
/* restore return value of orig_call or fentry prog back into RAX */
if (save_ret)
emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_FP, -8);
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 87eeb3a46a1d5..b9e5731594324 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -1035,6 +1035,11 @@ struct btf_func_model {
*/
#define BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY BIT(6)
+/* Indicate that current trampoline is in a tail call context. Then, it has to
+ * cache and restore tail_call_cnt to avoid infinite tail call loop.
+ */
+#define BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX BIT(7)
+
/* Each call __bpf_prog_enter + call bpf_func + call __bpf_prog_exit is ~50
* bytes on x86.
*/
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
index 53ff50cac61ea..e97aeda3a86b5 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
@@ -415,8 +415,8 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
goto out;
}
- /* clear all bits except SHARE_IPMODIFY */
- tr->flags &= BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY;
+ /* clear all bits except SHARE_IPMODIFY and TAIL_CALL_CTX */
+ tr->flags &= (BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY | BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX);
if (tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_FEXIT].nr_links ||
tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_MODIFY_RETURN].nr_links) {
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index dbba2b8060176..18e673c0ac159 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -19774,6 +19774,9 @@ static int check_attach_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
if (!tr)
return -ENOMEM;
+ if (tgt_prog && tgt_prog->aux->tail_call_reachable)
+ tr->flags = BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX;
+
prog->aux->dst_trampoline = tr;
return 0;
}
--
2.41.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-12 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-09-12 15:04 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop Leon Hwang
2023-09-12 15:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf, x64: Comment tail_call_cnt initialisation Leon Hwang
2023-09-12 15:04 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2023-09-12 15:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add testcases for tailcall infinite loop fixing Leon Hwang
2023-09-12 20:20 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop 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=20230912150442.2009-3-hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--to=hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=xukuohai@huawei.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