* [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.6 03/23] selftests/bpf: Verify that sync_linked_regs preserves subreg_def
[not found] <20241023143116.2981369-1-sashal@kernel.org>
@ 2024-10-23 14:30 ` Sasha Levin
2024-10-23 14:30 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.6 11/23] bpf: use kvzmalloc to allocate BPF verifier environment Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2024-10-23 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, stable
Cc: Eduard Zingerman, Andrii Nakryiko, Daniel Borkmann, Sasha Levin,
ast, shuah, bpf, linux-kselftest
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
[ Upstream commit a41b3828ec056a631ad22413d4560017fed5c3bd ]
This test was added because of a bug in verifier.c:sync_linked_regs(),
upon range propagation it destroyed subreg_def marks for registers.
The test is written in a way to return an upper half of a register
that is affected by range propagation and must have it's subreg_def
preserved. This gives a return value of 0 and leads to undefined
return value if subreg_def mark is not preserved.
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240924210844.1758441-2-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_scalar_ids.c | 67 +++++++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 67 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_scalar_ids.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_scalar_ids.c
index 13b29a7faa71a..d24d3a36ec144 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_scalar_ids.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_scalar_ids.c
@@ -656,4 +656,71 @@ __naked void two_old_ids_one_cur_id(void)
: __clobber_all);
}
+SEC("socket")
+/* Note the flag, see verifier.c:opt_subreg_zext_lo32_rnd_hi32() */
+__flag(BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32)
+__success
+/* This test was added because of a bug in verifier.c:sync_linked_regs(),
+ * upon range propagation it destroyed subreg_def marks for registers.
+ * The subreg_def mark is used to decide whether zero extension instructions
+ * are needed when register is read. When BPF_F_TEST_RND_HI32 is set it
+ * also causes generation of statements to randomize upper halves of
+ * read registers.
+ *
+ * The test is written in a way to return an upper half of a register
+ * that is affected by range propagation and must have it's subreg_def
+ * preserved. This gives a return value of 0 and leads to undefined
+ * return value if subreg_def mark is not preserved.
+ */
+__retval(0)
+/* Check that verifier believes r1/r0 are zero at exit */
+__log_level(2)
+__msg("4: (77) r1 >>= 32 ; R1_w=0")
+__msg("5: (bf) r0 = r1 ; R0_w=0 R1_w=0")
+__msg("6: (95) exit")
+__msg("from 3 to 4")
+__msg("4: (77) r1 >>= 32 ; R1_w=0")
+__msg("5: (bf) r0 = r1 ; R0_w=0 R1_w=0")
+__msg("6: (95) exit")
+/* Verify that statements to randomize upper half of r1 had not been
+ * generated.
+ */
+__xlated("call unknown")
+__xlated("r0 &= 2147483647")
+__xlated("w1 = w0")
+/* This is how disasm.c prints BPF_ZEXT_REG at the moment, x86 and arm
+ * are the only CI archs that do not need zero extension for subregs.
+ */
+#if !defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) && !defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)
+__xlated("w1 = w1")
+#endif
+__xlated("if w0 < 0xa goto pc+0")
+__xlated("r1 >>= 32")
+__xlated("r0 = r1")
+__xlated("exit")
+__naked void linked_regs_and_subreg_def(void)
+{
+ asm volatile (
+ "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];"
+ /* make sure r0 is in 32-bit range, otherwise w1 = w0 won't
+ * assign same IDs to registers.
+ */
+ "r0 &= 0x7fffffff;"
+ /* link w1 and w0 via ID */
+ "w1 = w0;"
+ /* 'if' statement propagates range info from w0 to w1,
+ * but should not affect w1->subreg_def property.
+ */
+ "if w0 < 10 goto +0;"
+ /* r1 is read here, on archs that require subreg zero
+ * extension this would cause zext patch generation.
+ */
+ "r1 >>= 32;"
+ "r0 = r1;"
+ "exit;"
+ :
+ : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns)
+ : __clobber_all);
+}
+
char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread* [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.6 11/23] bpf: use kvzmalloc to allocate BPF verifier environment
[not found] <20241023143116.2981369-1-sashal@kernel.org>
2024-10-23 14:30 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.6 03/23] selftests/bpf: Verify that sync_linked_regs preserves subreg_def Sasha Levin
@ 2024-10-23 14:30 ` Sasha Levin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sasha Levin @ 2024-10-23 14:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel, stable
Cc: Rik van Riel, Shakeel Butt, Alexei Starovoitov, Sasha Levin,
daniel, andrii, bpf
From: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
[ Upstream commit 434247637c66e1be2bc71a9987d4c3f0d8672387 ]
The kzmalloc call in bpf_check can fail when memory is very fragmented,
which in turn can lead to an OOM kill.
Use kvzmalloc to fall back to vmalloc when memory is too fragmented to
allocate an order 3 sized bpf verifier environment.
Admittedly this is not a very common case, and only happens on systems
where memory has already been squeezed close to the limit, but this does
not seem like much of a hot path, and it's a simple enough fix.
Signed-off-by: Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com>
Reviewed-by: Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241008170735.16766766@imladris.surriel.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 3032a464d31bb..50999c7b3b0e1 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -20226,7 +20226,7 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr, bpfptr_t uattr, __u3
/* 'struct bpf_verifier_env' can be global, but since it's not small,
* allocate/free it every time bpf_check() is called
*/
- env = kzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_verifier_env), GFP_KERNEL);
+ env = kvzalloc(sizeof(struct bpf_verifier_env), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!env)
return -ENOMEM;
@@ -20446,6 +20446,6 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr, bpfptr_t uattr, __u3
mutex_unlock(&bpf_verifier_lock);
vfree(env->insn_aux_data);
err_free_env:
- kfree(env);
+ kvfree(env);
return ret;
}
--
2.43.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread