BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org
Cc: daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev, kernel-team@fb.com,
	yonghong.song@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com,
	iii@linux.ibm.com, gimm78064@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] bpf: infer zext_dst based on static register liveness analysis
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2026 12:07:41 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260731-static-zext-v1-0-98a4dc73e94b@gmail.com> (raw)

Min-gyu Kim reported a bug in 32-bit operations zero extension
handling [1]. The bug was introduced by the commit [2].
The tl;dr of the bug is that the verifier does not carry zero
extension marks across pruning points. The detailed mechanism is
described in patch #3.

Fix this by reworking zero extension logic to avoid main-path based
subreg_def tracking, and instead extend the live registers analysis to
track upper register halves' liveness.

As noted in the commit message for patch #3:

  There is one notable drop in precision: whenever a BPF subprogram is
  called, all 64 bits of parameter registers are presumed to be used.
  The assumption is that such a drop in precision would not inflict
  noticeable performance penalty.

Ilya, could you please help with testing this conjecture?
Min-gyu, could you please test the proposed fix against your
reproducer?

Side note:
Patch #1 is a small refactoring for disasm.c, as patch #3 adds a new
location where bpf_verbose_insn() is called and there as well I have
to wrangle with the newline added by the disasm code.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAGKGUv=sOuqQtA1Ub-5JXfA4FPosJFYKAQE4B79cK+P1erxqtg@mail.gmail.com/
[2] commit 107e16979905 ("bpf: disable and remove registers chain based liveness")

---
Eduard Zingerman (5):
      bpf: do not print a newline after disassembly in bpf_verbose_insn()
      bpf: track upper 32-bit register halves' liveness in compute_live_registers()
      bpf: infer zext_dst based on static register liveness analysis
      bpf: simplify the bpf_is_reg64() signature
      selftests/bpf: verify zext_dst annotations for various instructions

 include/linux/bpf_verifier.h                      |  10 +-
 kernel/bpf/backtrack.c                            |   1 +
 kernel/bpf/disasm.c                               |  68 +++---
 kernel/bpf/fixups.c                               |  19 +-
 kernel/bpf/liveness.c                             | 139 +++++++++---
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                             | 150 ++-----------
 tools/bpf/bpftool/xlated_dumper.c                 |  10 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/disasm_helpers.c      |   3 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c |   2 +
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_zext.c | 260 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 10 files changed, 433 insertions(+), 229 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: fdec474c65fd35d5a6e1497ed50a9f98c07192f0
change-id: 20260731-static-zext-938cd128273c

             reply	other threads:[~2026-07-31 19:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-07-31 19:07 Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2026-07-31 19:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] bpf: do not print a newline after disassembly in bpf_verbose_insn() Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 20:24   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-31 21:12     ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 19:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf: track upper 32-bit register halves' liveness in compute_live_registers() Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 19:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 19:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] bpf: infer zext_dst based on static register liveness analysis Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 19:26   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 21:17     ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 19:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: simplify the bpf_is_reg64() signature Eduard Zingerman
2026-07-31 19:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-07-31 20:09   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-31 19:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: verify zext_dst annotations for various instructions 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=20260731-static-zext-v1-0-98a4dc73e94b@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=gimm78064@gmail.com \
    --cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
    --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