From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, memxor@gmail.com,
awerner32@gmail.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf v2 10/11] bpf: keep track of max number of bpf_loop callback iterations
Date: Sat, 18 Nov 2023 03:33:54 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20231118013355.7943-11-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20231118013355.7943-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
In some cases verifier can't infer convergence of the bpf_loop()
iteration. E.g. for the following program:
static int cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context* ctx)
{
ctx->i++;
return 0;
}
SEC("?raw_tp")
int prog(void *_)
{
struct num_context ctx = { .i = 0 };
__u8 choice_arr[2] = { 0, 1 };
bpf_loop(2, cb, &ctx, 0);
return choice_arr[ctx.i];
}
Each 'cb' simulation would eventually return to 'prog' and reach
'return choice_arr[ctx.i]' statement. At which point ctx.i would be
marked precise, thus forcing verifier to track multitude of separate
states with {.i=0}, {.i=1}, ... at bpf_loop() callback entry.
This commit allows "brute force" handling for such cases by limiting
number of callback body simulations using 'umax' value of the first
bpf_loop() parameter.
For this, extend bpf_func_state with 'callback_depth' field.
Increment this field when callback visiting state is pushed to states
traversal stack. For frame #N it's 'callback_depth' field counts how
many times callback with frame depth N+1 had been executed.
Use bpf_func_state specifically to allow independent tracking of
callback depths when multiple nested bpf_loop() calls are present.
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 9 ++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 17 +++++++++--
.../bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c | 29 ++++++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index 7def320aceef..71b7c7c39cea 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -301,6 +301,15 @@ struct bpf_func_state {
struct tnum callback_ret_range;
bool in_async_callback_fn;
bool in_exception_callback_fn;
+ /* For callback calling functions that limit number of possible
+ * callback executions (e.g. bpf_loop) keeps track of current
+ * simulated iteration number. When non-zero either:
+ * - current frame has a child frame, in such case it's callsite points
+ * to callback calling function;
+ * - current frame is a topmost frame, in such case callback has just
+ * returned and env->insn_idx points to callback calling function.
+ */
+ u32 callback_depth;
/* The following fields should be last. See copy_func_state() */
int acquired_refs;
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index b9e3067890b7..843d1d3be63e 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -9683,6 +9683,8 @@ static int push_callback_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *ins
return err;
callback_state->callback_iter_depth++;
+ callback_state->frame[callback_state->curframe - 1]->callback_depth++;
+ caller->callback_depth = 0;
return 0;
}
@@ -10485,8 +10487,19 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
break;
case BPF_FUNC_loop:
update_loop_inline_state(env, meta.subprogno);
- err = push_callback_call(env, insn, insn_idx, meta.subprogno,
- set_loop_callback_state);
+ /* Verifier relies on R1 value to determine if bpf_loop() iteration
+ * is finished, thus mark it precise.
+ */
+ mark_chain_precision(env, BPF_REG_1);
+ if (cur_func(env)->callback_depth < regs[BPF_REG_1].umax_value) {
+ err = push_callback_call(env, insn, insn_idx, meta.subprogno,
+ set_loop_callback_state);
+ } else {
+ cur_func(env)->callback_depth = 0;
+ if (env->log.level & BPF_LOG_LEVEL2)
+ verbose(env, "frame%d bpf_loop iteration limit reached\n",
+ env->cur_state->curframe);
+ }
break;
case BPF_FUNC_dynptr_from_mem:
if (regs[BPF_REG_1].type != PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE) {
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c
index ec4cd596b8c6..e753fb52dcdd 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c
@@ -119,7 +119,23 @@ __naked int global_subprog_result_precise(void)
SEC("?raw_tp")
__success __log_level(2)
-/* First simulated path does not include callback body */
+/* First simulated path does not include callback body,
+ * r1 and r4 are always precise for bpf_loop() calls.
+ */
+__msg("9: (85) call bpf_loop#181")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 9 first_idx 9 subseq_idx -1")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r4 stack=:")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 8 first_idx 0 subseq_idx 9")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 8: (b7) r4 = 0")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 9 first_idx 9 subseq_idx -1")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r1 stack=:")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 8 first_idx 0 subseq_idx 9")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r1 stack= before 8: (b7) r4 = 0")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r1 stack= before 7: (b7) r3 = 0")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r1 stack= before 6: (bf) r2 = r8")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r1 stack= before 5: (bf) r1 = r6")
+__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 4: (b7) r6 = 3")
+/* r6 precision propagation */
__msg("14: (0f) r1 += r6")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 14 first_idx 9")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 13: (bf) r1 = r7")
@@ -134,8 +150,7 @@ __msg("17: (b7) r0 = 0")
__msg("18: (95) exit")
__msg("returning from callee:")
__msg("to caller at 9:")
-/* r4 (flags) is always precise for bpf_loop() */
-__msg("frame 0: propagating r4")
+__msg("frame 0: propagating r1,r4")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 9 first_idx 9 subseq_idx -1")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=:")
__msg("from 18 to 9: safe")
@@ -264,10 +279,10 @@ __msg("15: (b7) r0 = 0")
__msg("16: (95) exit")
__msg("returning from callee:")
__msg("to caller at 9:")
-/* r4 (flags) is always precise for bpf_loop(),
+/* r1, r4 are always precise for bpf_loop(),
* r6 was marked before backtracking to callback body.
*/
-__msg("frame 0: propagating r4,r6")
+__msg("frame 0: propagating r1,r4,r6")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 9 first_idx 9 subseq_idx -1")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=:")
__msg("from 16 to 9: safe")
@@ -419,10 +434,10 @@ __msg("17: (b7) r0 = 0")
__msg("18: (95) exit")
__msg("returning from callee:")
__msg("to caller at 10:")
-/* r4 (flags) is always precise for bpf_loop(),
+/* r1, r4 are always precise for bpf_loop(),
* fp-8 was marked before backtracking to callback body.
*/
-__msg("frame 0: propagating r4,fp-8")
+__msg("frame 0: propagating r1,r4,fp-8")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 10 first_idx 10 subseq_idx -1")
__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=:")
__msg("from 18 to 10: safe")
--
2.42.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-11-18 1:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-11-18 1:33 [PATCH bpf v2 00/11] verify callbacks as if they are called unknown number of times Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 01/11] selftests/bpf: track tcp payload offset as scalar in xdp_synproxy Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 02/11] selftests/bpf: track string payload offset as scalar in strobemeta Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 03/11] selftests/bpf: fix bpf_loop_bench for new callback verification scheme Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 04/11] bpf: extract __check_reg_arg() utility function Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 05/11] bpf: extract setup_func_entry() " Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 06/11] bpf: verify callbacks as if they are called unknown number of times Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 1:41 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-11-20 1:46 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 07/11] selftests/bpf: tests for iterating callbacks Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 08/11] bpf: widening for callback iterators Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 09/11] selftests/bpf: test widening for iterating callbacks Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-18 1:33 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-11-20 2:00 ` [PATCH bpf v2 10/11] bpf: keep track of max number of bpf_loop callback iterations Alexei Starovoitov
2023-11-20 2:06 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 2:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-11-18 1:33 ` [PATCH bpf v2 11/11] selftests/bpf: check if max number of bpf_loop iterations is tracked Eduard Zingerman
2023-11-20 2:09 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-11-20 2:23 ` Eduard Zingerman
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=20231118013355.7943-11-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=awerner32@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.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