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, jemarch@gnu.org,
thinker.li@gmail.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] selftests/bpf: adjust dummy_st_ops_success to detect additional error
Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2024 18:28:18 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240424012821.595216-3-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240424012821.595216-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
As reported by Jose E. Marchesi in off-list discussion, GCC and LLVM
generate slightly different code for dummy_st_ops_success/test_1():
SEC("struct_ops/test_1")
int BPF_PROG(test_1, struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state)
{
int ret;
if (!state)
return 0xf2f3f4f5;
ret = state->val;
state->val = 0x5a;
return ret;
}
GCC-generated LLVM-generated
---------------------------- ---------------------------
0: r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0x0) 0: w0 = -0xd0c0b0b
1: if r1 == 0x0 goto 5f 1: r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0x0)
2: r0 = *(s32 *)(r1 + 0x0) 2: if r1 == 0x0 goto 6f
3: *(u32 *)(r1 + 0x0) = 0x5a 3: r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 0x0)
4: exit 4: w2 = 0x5a
5: r0 = -0xd0c0b0b 5: *(u32 *)(r1 + 0x0) = r2
6: exit 6: exit
If the 'state' argument is not marked as nullable in
net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c, the verifier would assume that
'r1 == 0x0' is never true:
- for the GCC version, this means that instructions #5-6 would be
marked as dead and removed;
- for the LLVM version, all instructions would be marked as live.
The test dummy_st_ops/dummy_init_ret_value actually sets the 'state'
parameter to NULL.
Therefore, when the 'state' argument is not marked as nullable,
the GCC-generated version of the code would trigger a NULL pointer
dereference at instruction #3.
This patch updates the test_1() test case to always follow a shape
similar to the GCC-generated version above, in order to verify whether
the 'state' nullability is marked correctly.
Reported-by: Jose E. Marchesi <jemarch@gnu.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
.../selftests/bpf/progs/dummy_st_ops_success.c | 13 +++++++++++--
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/dummy_st_ops_success.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/dummy_st_ops_success.c
index 1efa746c25dc..cc7b69b001aa 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/dummy_st_ops_success.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/dummy_st_ops_success.c
@@ -11,8 +11,17 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_1, struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state)
{
int ret;
- if (!state)
- return 0xf2f3f4f5;
+ /* Check that 'state' nullable status is detected correctly.
+ * If 'state' argument would be assumed non-null by verifier
+ * the code below would be deleted as dead (which it shouldn't).
+ * Hide it from the compiler behind 'asm' block to avoid
+ * unnecessary optimizations.
+ */
+ asm volatile (
+ "if %[state] != 0 goto +2;"
+ "r0 = 0xf2f3f4f5;"
+ "exit;"
+ ::[state]"p"(state));
ret = state->val;
state->val = 0x5a;
--
2.34.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-24 1:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-24 1:28 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] check bpf_dummy_struct_ops program params for test runs Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-24 1:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] bpf: mark bpf_dummy_struct_ops.test_1 parameter as nullable Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-24 1:28 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-04-24 1:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] selftests/bpf: do not pass NULL for non-nullable params in dummy_st_ops Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-24 1:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: check bpf_dummy_struct_ops program params for test runs Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-24 1:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: dummy_st_ops should reject 0 for non-nullable params Eduard Zingerman
2024-04-25 19:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] check bpf_dummy_struct_ops program params for test runs 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=20240424012821.595216-3-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=jemarch@gnu.org \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=thinker.li@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