From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Vlad Poenaru <thevlad@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix kmemleak warnings for percpu hashmap
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2025 09:55:14 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250224175514.2207227-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
Vlad Poenaru from Meta reported the following kmemleak issues:
...
unreferenced object 0x606fd7c44ac8 (size 32):
comm "floodgate_agent", pid 5077, jiffies 4294746072
hex dump (first 32 bytes on cpu 32):
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace (crc 0):
pcpu_alloc_noprof+0x730/0xeb0
bpf_map_alloc_percpu+0x69/0xc0
prealloc_init+0x9d/0x1b0
htab_map_alloc+0x363/0x510
map_create+0x215/0x3a0
__sys_bpf+0x16b/0x3e0
__x64_sys_bpf+0x18/0x20
do_syscall_64+0x7b/0x150
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
unreferenced object 0x606fd7c44ae8 (size 32):
comm "floodgate_agent", pid 5077, jiffies 4294746072
hex dump (first 32 bytes on cpu 32):
d3 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 d3 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ................
backtrace (crc d197b0fe):
pcpu_alloc_noprof+0x730/0xeb0
bpf_map_alloc_percpu+0x69/0xc0
prealloc_init+0x9d/0x1b0
htab_map_alloc+0x363/0x510
map_create+0x215/0x3a0
__sys_bpf+0x16b/0x3e0
__x64_sys_bpf+0x18/0x20
do_syscall_64+0x7b/0x150
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
...
Further investigation shows the reason is due to not 8-byte aligned
store of percpu pointer in htab_elem_set_ptr():
*(void __percpu **)(l->key + key_size) = pptr;
Note that the whole htab_elem alignment is 8 (for x86_64). If the key_size
is 4, that means pptr is stored in a location which is 4 byte aligned but
not 8 byte aligned. In mm/kmemleak.c, scan_block() scans the memory based
on 8 byte stride, so it won't detect above pptr, hence reporting the memory
leak.
In htab_map_alloc(), we already have
htab->elem_size = sizeof(struct htab_elem) +
round_up(htab->map.key_size, 8);
if (percpu)
htab->elem_size += sizeof(void *);
else
htab->elem_size += round_up(htab->map.value_size, 8);
So storing pptr with 8-byte alignment won't cause any problem and can fix
kmemleak too.
The issue can be reproduced with bpf selftest as well:
1. Enable CONFIG_DEBUG_KMEMLEAK config
2. Add a getchar() before skel destroy in test_hash_map() in prog_tests/for_each.c.
The purpose is to keep map available so kmemleak can be detected.
3. run './test_progs -t for_each/hash_map &' and a kmemleak should be reported.
unreferenced object 0x607e08c1fd30 (size 8):
comm "test_progs", pid 1969, jiffies 4294706961
hex dump (first 8 bytes on cpu 2):
03 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ........
backtrace (crc 844a0efa):
pcpu_alloc_noprof+0xf33/0x14a0
bpf_map_alloc_percpu+0x9c/0x200
prealloc_init+0x1e7/0x730
htab_map_alloc+0x698/0xc70
map_create+0x489/0xcb0
__sys_bpf+0x443/0x560
__x64_sys_bpf+0x7c/0x90
do_syscall_64+0x58/0xf0
entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e
cc: Vlad Poenaru <thevlad@meta.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
kernel/bpf/hashtab.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
index 4a9eeb7aef85..c308300fc72f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
@@ -198,12 +198,12 @@ static bool htab_is_percpu(const struct bpf_htab *htab)
static inline void htab_elem_set_ptr(struct htab_elem *l, u32 key_size,
void __percpu *pptr)
{
- *(void __percpu **)(l->key + key_size) = pptr;
+ *(void __percpu **)(l->key + roundup(key_size, 8)) = pptr;
}
static inline void __percpu *htab_elem_get_ptr(struct htab_elem *l, u32 key_size)
{
- return *(void __percpu **)(l->key + key_size);
+ return *(void __percpu **)(l->key + roundup(key_size, 8));
}
static void *fd_htab_map_get_ptr(const struct bpf_map *map, struct htab_elem *l)
@@ -2354,7 +2354,7 @@ static int htab_percpu_map_gen_lookup(struct bpf_map *map, struct bpf_insn *insn
*insn++ = BPF_EMIT_CALL(__htab_map_lookup_elem);
*insn++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 3);
*insn++ = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0,
- offsetof(struct htab_elem, key) + map->key_size);
+ offsetof(struct htab_elem, key) + roundup(map->key_size, 8));
*insn++ = BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0);
*insn++ = BPF_MOV64_PERCPU_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0);
--
2.43.5
next reply other threads:[~2025-02-24 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-24 17:55 Yonghong Song [this message]
2025-02-24 19:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix kmemleak warnings for percpu hashmap Martin KaFai Lau
2025-02-24 20:20 ` 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=20250224175514.2207227-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=thevlad@meta.com \
/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