public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 v5 bpf-next 12/23] bpf: generalize is_branch_taken() to work with two registers
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2023 11:13:35 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231027181346.4019398-13-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231027181346.4019398-1-andrii@kernel.org>

While still assuming that second register is a constant, generalize
is_branch_taken-related code to accept two registers instead of register
plus explicit constant value. This also, as a side effect, allows to
simplify check_cond_jmp_op() by unifying BPF_K case with BPF_X case, for
which we use a fake register to represent BPF_K's imm constant as
a register.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 58 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
 1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index aa13f32751a1..fd328c579f10 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -14169,8 +14169,13 @@ static void find_good_pkt_pointers(struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
 	}));
 }
 
-static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
+/*
+ * <reg1> <op> <reg2>, currently assuming reg2 is a constant
+ */
+static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, struct bpf_reg_state *reg2, u8 opcode)
 {
+	struct tnum subreg = tnum_subreg(reg1->var_off);
+	u32 val = (u32)tnum_subreg(reg2->var_off).value;
 	s32 sval = (s32)val;
 
 	switch (opcode) {
@@ -14250,8 +14255,12 @@ static int is_branch32_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u32 val, u8 opcode)
 }
 
 
-static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode)
+/*
+ * <reg1> <op> <reg2>, currently assuming reg2 is a constant
+ */
+static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, struct bpf_reg_state *reg2, u8 opcode)
 {
+	u64 val = reg2->var_off.value;
 	s64 sval = (s64)val;
 
 	switch (opcode) {
@@ -14330,16 +14339,23 @@ static int is_branch64_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode)
 	return -1;
 }
 
-/* compute branch direction of the expression "if (reg opcode val) goto target;"
+/* compute branch direction of the expression "if (<reg1> opcode <reg2>) goto target;"
  * and return:
  *  1 - branch will be taken and "goto target" will be executed
  *  0 - branch will not be taken and fall-through to next insn
- * -1 - unknown. Example: "if (reg < 5)" is unknown when register value
+ * -1 - unknown. Example: "if (reg1 < 5)" is unknown when register value
  *      range [0,10]
  */
-static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode,
-			   bool is_jmp32)
+static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, struct bpf_reg_state *reg2,
+			   u8 opcode, bool is_jmp32)
 {
+	struct tnum reg2_tnum = is_jmp32 ? tnum_subreg(reg2->var_off) : reg2->var_off;
+	u64 val;
+
+	if (!tnum_is_const(reg2_tnum))
+		return -1;
+	val = reg2_tnum.value;
+
 	if (__is_pointer_value(false, reg1)) {
 		if (!reg_not_null(reg1))
 			return -1;
@@ -14361,8 +14377,8 @@ static int is_branch_taken(struct bpf_reg_state *reg1, u64 val, u8 opcode,
 	}
 
 	if (is_jmp32)
-		return is_branch32_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
-	return is_branch64_taken(reg1, val, opcode);
+		return is_branch32_taken(reg1, reg2, opcode);
+	return is_branch64_taken(reg1, reg2, opcode);
 }
 
 static int flip_opcode(u32 opcode)
@@ -14833,6 +14849,7 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 	struct bpf_reg_state *regs = this_branch->frame[this_branch->curframe]->regs;
 	struct bpf_reg_state *dst_reg, *other_branch_regs, *src_reg = NULL;
 	struct bpf_reg_state *eq_branch_regs;
+	struct bpf_reg_state fake_reg;
 	u8 opcode = BPF_OP(insn->code);
 	bool is_jmp32;
 	int pred = -1;
@@ -14873,36 +14890,27 @@ static int check_cond_jmp_op(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
 			verbose(env, "BPF_JMP/JMP32 uses reserved fields\n");
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
+		src_reg = &fake_reg;
+		src_reg->type = SCALAR_VALUE;
+		__mark_reg_known(src_reg, insn->imm);
 	}
 
 	is_jmp32 = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_JMP32;
 
 	if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_K) {
-		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg, insn->imm, opcode, is_jmp32);
+		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg, src_reg, opcode, is_jmp32);
 	} else if (src_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE &&
 		   is_jmp32 && tnum_is_const(tnum_subreg(src_reg->var_off))) {
-		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg,
-				       tnum_subreg(src_reg->var_off).value,
-				       opcode,
-				       is_jmp32);
+		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg, src_reg, opcode, is_jmp32);
 	} else if (src_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE &&
 		   !is_jmp32 && tnum_is_const(src_reg->var_off)) {
-		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg,
-				       src_reg->var_off.value,
-				       opcode,
-				       is_jmp32);
+		pred = is_branch_taken(dst_reg, src_reg, opcode, is_jmp32);
 	} else if (dst_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE &&
 		   is_jmp32 && tnum_is_const(tnum_subreg(dst_reg->var_off))) {
-		pred = is_branch_taken(src_reg,
-				       tnum_subreg(dst_reg->var_off).value,
-				       flip_opcode(opcode),
-				       is_jmp32);
+		pred = is_branch_taken(src_reg, dst_reg, flip_opcode(opcode), is_jmp32);
 	} else if (dst_reg->type == SCALAR_VALUE &&
 		   !is_jmp32 && tnum_is_const(dst_reg->var_off)) {
-		pred = is_branch_taken(src_reg,
-				       dst_reg->var_off.value,
-				       flip_opcode(opcode),
-				       is_jmp32);
+		pred = is_branch_taken(src_reg, dst_reg, flip_opcode(opcode), is_jmp32);
 	} else if (reg_is_pkt_pointer_any(dst_reg) &&
 		   reg_is_pkt_pointer_any(src_reg) &&
 		   !is_jmp32) {
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-10-27 18:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 77+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-10-27 18:13 [PATCH v5 bpf-next 00/23] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 01/23] selftests/bpf: fix RELEASE=1 build for tc_opts Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 02/23] selftests/bpf: satisfy compiler by having explicit return in btf test Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 03/23] bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-31 17:30     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 04/23] bpf: derive smin32/smax32 from umin32/umax32 bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 05/23] bpf: derive subreg bounds from full bounds when upper 32 bits are constant Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 06/23] bpf: add special smin32/smax32 derivation from 64-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-31 17:39     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 18:41       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 18:49         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 07/23] bpf: improve deduction of 64-bit bounds from 32-bit bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:37   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-31 20:26   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 20:33     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 08/23] bpf: try harder to deduce register bounds from different numeric domains Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 09/23] bpf: drop knowledge-losing __reg_combine_{32,64}_into_{64,32} logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:38   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 10/23] selftests/bpf: BPF register range bounds tester Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-08 22:08   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-08 23:23     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-09  0:30       ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 11/23] bpf: rename is_branch_taken reg arguments to prepare for the second one Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-30 19:39   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  5:19     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-10-31 15:38   ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 12/23] bpf: generalize is_branch_taken() to work with two registers Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-31 17:41     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 13/23] bpf: move is_branch_taken() down Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 14/23] bpf: generalize is_branch_taken to handle all conditional jumps in one place Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 15:38   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 15/23] bpf: unify 32-bit and 64-bit is_branch_taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-30 19:52   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  5:28     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 17:35   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 16/23] bpf: prepare reg_set_min_max for second set of registers Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 17/23] bpf: generalize reg_set_min_max() to handle two sets of two registers Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31  2:02   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  6:03     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 16:23       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 17:50         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 17:56           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 18:04             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 18:06               ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 18:14   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 18/23] bpf: generalize reg_set_min_max() to handle non-const register comparisons Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 23:25   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-01 16:35     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-01 17:12       ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 19/23] bpf: generalize is_scalar_branch_taken() logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31  2:12   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  6:12     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 16:34       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 18:01         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 20:53           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 20:55             ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 20/23] bpf: enhance BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE is_branch_taken logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31  2:20   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  6:16     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 16:36       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31 18:04         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-31 18:06           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 21/23] selftests/bpf: adjust OP_EQ/OP_NE handling to use subranges for branch taken Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-08 18:22   ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-08 19:59     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 22/23] selftests/bpf: add range x range test to reg_bounds Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-27 18:13 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 23/23] selftests/bpf: add iter test requiring range x range logic Andrii Nakryiko
2023-10-30 17:55 ` [PATCH v5 bpf-next 00/23] BPF register bounds logic and testing improvements Alexei Starovoitov
2023-10-31  5:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-01 12:37     ` Paul Chaignon
2023-11-01 17:13       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-11-07  6:37         ` Harishankar Vishwanathan
2023-11-07 16:38           ` Paul Chaignon

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=20231027181346.4019398-13-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