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>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	David Vernet <void@manifault.com>,
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/17] bpf: Detect IP == ksym.end as part of BPF program
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 01:32:08 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230912233214.1518551-12-memxor@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230912233214.1518551-1-memxor@gmail.com>

Now that bpf_throw kfunc is the first such call instruction that has
noreturn semantics within the verifier, this also kicks in dead code
elimination in unprecedented ways. For one, any instruction following
a bpf_throw call will never be marked as seen. Moreover, if a callchain
ends up throwing, any instructions after the call instruction to the
eventually throwing subprog in callers will also never be marked as
seen.

The tempting way to fix this would be to emit extra 'int3' instructions
which bump the jited_len of a program, and ensure that during runtime
when a program throws, we can discover its boundaries even if the call
instruction to bpf_throw (or to subprogs that always throw) is emitted
as the final instruction in the program.

An example of such a program would be this:

do_something():
	...
	r0 = 0
	exit

foo():
	r1 = 0
	call bpf_throw
	r0 = 0
	exit

bar(cond):
	if r1 != 0 goto pc+2
	call do_something
	exit
	call foo
	r0 = 0  // Never seen by verifier
	exit	//

main(ctx):
	r1 = ...
	call bar
	r0 = 0
	exit

Here, if we do end up throwing, the stacktrace would be the following:

bpf_throw
foo
bar
main

In bar, the final instruction emitted will be the call to foo, as such,
the return address will be the subsequent instruction (which the JIT
emits as int3 on x86). This will end up lying outside the jited_len of
the program, thus, when unwinding, we will fail to discover the return
address as belonging to any program and end up in a panic due to the
unreliable stack unwinding of BPF programs that we never expect.

To remedy this case, make bpf_prog_ksym_find treat IP == ksym.end as
part of the BPF program, so that is_bpf_text_address returns true when
such a case occurs, and we are able to unwind reliably when the final
instruction ends up being a call instruction.

Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
---
 kernel/bpf/core.c | 6 +++++-
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 7849b9cca749..8f921b6d6981 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -623,7 +623,11 @@ static __always_inline int bpf_tree_comp(void *key, struct latch_tree_node *n)
 
 	if (val < ksym->start)
 		return -1;
-	if (val >= ksym->end)
+	/* Ensure that we detect return addresses as part of the program, when
+	 * the final instruction is a call for a program part of the stack
+	 * trace. Therefore, do val > ksym->end instead of val >= ksym->end.
+	 */
+	if (val > ksym->end)
 		return  1;
 
 	return 0;
-- 
2.41.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-09-12 23:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-09-12 23:31 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/17] Exceptions - 1/2 Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/17] bpf: Use bpf_is_subprog to check for subprogs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/17] arch/x86: Implement arch_bpf_stack_walk Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/17] bpf: Implement support for adding hidden subprogs Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/17] bpf: Implement BPF exceptions Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/17] bpf: Refactor check_btf_func and split into two phases Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/17] bpf: Add support for custom exception callbacks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/17] bpf: Perform CFG walk for exception callback Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/17] bpf: Treat first argument as return value for bpf_throw Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/17] mm: kasan: Declare kasan_unpoison_task_stack_below in kasan.h Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-16 16:24   ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/17] bpf: Prevent KASAN false positive with bpf_throw Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-16 16:25   ` Andrey Konovalov
2023-09-18 13:20   ` Matthieu Baerts
2023-09-18 13:26     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi [this message]
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/17] bpf: Disallow fentry/fexit/freplace for exception callbacks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-13 15:24   ` Puranjay Mohan
2023-09-14 12:13     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-16 16:44       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-09-16 17:30         ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-16 19:34           ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-18  1:56             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/17] bpf: Fix kfunc callback register type handling Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 14/17] libbpf: Refactor bpf_object__reloc_code Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 15/17] libbpf: Add support for custom exception callbacks Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-20  0:25   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-20  1:02     ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-20 17:08       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 16/17] selftests/bpf: Add BPF assertion macros Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:32 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 17/17] selftests/bpf: Add tests for BPF exceptions Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-13 15:14   ` Puranjay Mohan
2023-09-13 16:12     ` Puranjay Mohan
2023-09-12 23:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/17] Exceptions - 1/2 Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-09-12 23:53 ` Puranjay Mohan
2023-09-16 16:50 ` 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=20230912233214.1518551-12-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=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /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