From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
<martin.lau@kernel.org>
Cc: <andrii@kernel.org>, <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: enhance subregister bounds deduction logic
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2023 13:57:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231022205743.72352-4-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231022205743.72352-1-andrii@kernel.org>
Add handling of a bunch of possible cases which allows deducing extra
information about subregister bounds, both u32 and s32, from full register
u64/s64 bounds.
Also add smin32/smax32 bounds derivation from corresponding umin32/umax32
bounds, similar to what we did with smin/smax from umin/umax derivation in
previous patch.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 52 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 52 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 885dd4a2ff3a..3fc9bd5e72b8 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -2130,6 +2130,58 @@ static void __update_reg_bounds(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
/* Uses signed min/max values to inform unsigned, and vice-versa */
static void __reg32_deduce_bounds(struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
{
+ /* if upper 32 bits of u64/s64 range don't change,
+ * we can use lower 32 bits to improve our u32/s32 boundaries
+ */
+ if ((reg->umin_value >> 32) == (reg->umax_value >> 32)) {
+ /* u64 to u32 casting preserves validity of low 32 bits as
+ * a range, if upper 32 bits are the same
+ */
+ reg->u32_min_value = max_t(u32, reg->u32_min_value, (u32)reg->umin_value);
+ reg->u32_max_value = min_t(u32, reg->u32_max_value, (u32)reg->umax_value);
+
+ if ((s32)reg->umin_value <= (s32)reg->umax_value) {
+ reg->s32_min_value = max_t(s32, reg->s32_min_value, (s32)reg->umin_value);
+ reg->s32_max_value = min_t(s32, reg->s32_max_value, (s32)reg->umax_value);
+ }
+ }
+ if ((reg->smin_value >> 32) == (reg->smax_value >> 32)) {
+ /* low 32 bits should form a proper u32 range */
+ if ((u32)reg->smin_value <= (u32)reg->smax_value) {
+ reg->u32_min_value = max_t(u32, reg->u32_min_value, (u32)reg->smin_value);
+ reg->u32_max_value = min_t(u32, reg->u32_max_value, (u32)reg->smax_value);
+ }
+ /* low 32 bits should form a proper s32 range */
+ if ((s32)reg->smin_value <= (s32)reg->smax_value) {
+ reg->s32_min_value = max_t(s32, reg->s32_min_value, (s32)reg->smin_value);
+ reg->s32_max_value = min_t(s32, reg->s32_max_value, (s32)reg->smax_value);
+ }
+ }
+ /* Special case where upper bits form a small sequence of two
+ * sequential numbers (in 32-bit unsigned space, so 0xffffffff to
+ * 0x00000000 is also valid), while lower bits form a proper s32 range
+ * going from negative numbers to positive numbers.
+ * E.g.: [0xfffffff0ffffff00; 0xfffffff100000010]. Iterating
+ * over full 64-bit numbers range will form a proper [-16, 16]
+ * ([0xffffff00; 0x00000010]) range in its lower 32 bits.
+ */
+ if ((u32)(reg->umin_value >> 32) + 1 == (u32)(reg->umax_value >> 32) &&
+ (s32)reg->umin_value < 0 && (s32)reg->umax_value >= 0) {
+ reg->s32_min_value = max_t(s32, reg->s32_min_value, (s32)reg->umin_value);
+ reg->s32_max_value = min_t(s32, reg->s32_max_value, (s32)reg->umax_value);
+ }
+ if ((u32)(reg->smin_value >> 32) + 1 == (u32)(reg->smax_value >> 32) &&
+ (s32)reg->smin_value < 0 && (s32)reg->smax_value >= 0) {
+ reg->s32_min_value = max_t(s32, reg->s32_min_value, (s32)reg->smin_value);
+ reg->s32_max_value = min_t(s32, reg->s32_max_value, (s32)reg->smax_value);
+ }
+ /* if u32 range forms a valid s32 range (due to matching sign bit),
+ * try to learn from that
+ */
+ if ((s32)reg->u32_min_value <= (s32)reg->u32_max_value) {
+ reg->s32_min_value = max_t(s32, reg->s32_min_value, reg->u32_min_value);
+ reg->s32_max_value = min_t(s32, reg->s32_max_value, reg->u32_max_value);
+ }
/* Learn sign from signed bounds.
* If we cannot cross the sign boundary, then signed and unsigned bounds
* are the same, so combine. This works even in the negative case, e.g.
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-22 20:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-22 20:57 [PATCH v4 bpf-next 0/7] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 1/7] bpf: improve JEQ/JNE branch taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-23 2:33 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 2/7] bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-23 2:36 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-24 13:08 ` Daniel Borkmann
2023-10-24 14:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-24 15:43 ` Daniel Borkmann
2023-10-22 20:57 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-10-23 3:20 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: enhance subregister bounds deduction logic Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-23 3:56 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-23 16:23 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-24 12:05 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-24 12:22 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-24 15:31 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-27 8:16 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: improve deduction of 64-bit bounds from 32-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 5/7] bpf: try harder to deduce register bounds from different numeric domains Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: drop knowledge-losing __reg_combine_{32,64}_into_{64,32} logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-22 20:57 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-22 23:01 ` kernel test robot
2023-10-24 13:40 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 0/7] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements 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=20231022205743.72352-4-andrii@kernel.org \
--to=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
/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