BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ning Ding <dingning04@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Ning Ding <dingning04@gmail.com>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	Justin Suess <utilityemal77@gmail.com>,
	Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>,
	linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test RCU pointer invalidation after spin unlock
Date: Mon,  3 Aug 2026 04:26:09 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260803112615.3362122-3-dingning04@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260803112615.3362122-1-dingning04@gmail.com>

The verifier previously accepted a task kptr after the final spin unlock
ended its RCU protection in a sleepable program. The pointer could then be
used after the task was freed.

Add a negative test for that case. Add positive controls showing that the
pointer remains valid in a non-sleepable program and while an explicit RCU
read-side section is still active.

Assisted-by: Codex:gpt-5.6-sol
Assisted-by: ChatGPT:GPT-5.6-Pro
Signed-off-by: Ning Ding <dingning04@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c     |  2 +
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_common.h   | 12 +++++
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c  | 24 ++++++++++
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_success.c  | 48 +++++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 86 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
index e6e95c1416e65..fbd7855712c1a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
@@ -176,6 +176,8 @@ static const char * const success_tests[] = {
 	"test_task_from_pid_current",
 	"test_task_from_pid_invalid",
 	"task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked",
+	"task_kfunc_acquire_after_spin_unlock_non_sleepable",
+	"task_kfunc_acquire_after_spin_unlock_explicit_rcu",
 	"test_task_kfunc_flavor_relo",
 	"test_task_kfunc_flavor_relo_not_found",
 };
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_common.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_common.h
index e9c4fea7a4bba..052c9d0e3e2a8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_common.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_common.h
@@ -20,6 +20,18 @@ struct {
 	__uint(max_entries, 1);
 } __tasks_kfunc_map SEC(".maps");
 
+struct task_kptr_lock_value {
+	struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
+	struct task_struct __kptr * task;
+};
+
+struct {
+	__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY);
+	__type(key, int);
+	__type(value, struct task_kptr_lock_value);
+	__uint(max_entries, 1);
+} task_kptr_lock_map SEC(".maps");
+
 struct task_struct *bpf_task_acquire(struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
 void bpf_task_release(struct task_struct *p) __ksym;
 struct task_struct *bpf_task_from_pid(s32 pid) __ksym;
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
index 5c99b1e6532bf..c0e7216b34193 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_failure.c
@@ -378,3 +378,27 @@ int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_release_in_map, struct task_struct *task, u64 clone_flag
 
 	return 0;
 }
+
+SEC("?fentry.s/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
+__failure __msg("R1 must be a rcu pointer")
+int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_acquire_after_final_spin_unlock)
+{
+	struct task_kptr_lock_value *v;
+	struct task_struct *task, *acquired;
+	int key = 0;
+
+	v = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&task_kptr_lock_map, &key);
+	if (!v)
+		return 0;
+
+	bpf_spin_lock(&v->lock);
+	task = v->task;
+	bpf_spin_unlock(&v->lock);
+	if (!task)
+		return 0;
+
+	acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task);
+	if (acquired)
+		bpf_task_release(acquired);
+	return 0;
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_success.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_success.c
index d63a79ee33dce..2bab7634c9dfd 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_success.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/task_kfunc_success.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
 #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
 
 #include "../bpf_experimental.h"
+#include "bpf_misc.h"
 #include "task_kfunc_common.h"
 
 char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
@@ -366,6 +367,53 @@ int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked, struct task_struct *task, u64 cl
 	return 0;
 }
 
+SEC("fentry/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
+int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_acquire_after_spin_unlock_non_sleepable)
+{
+	struct task_kptr_lock_value *v;
+	struct task_struct *task, *acquired;
+	int key = 0;
+
+	v = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&task_kptr_lock_map, &key);
+	if (!v)
+		return 0;
+
+	bpf_spin_lock(&v->lock);
+	task = v->task;
+	bpf_spin_unlock(&v->lock);
+	if (!task)
+		return 0;
+
+	acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task);
+	if (acquired)
+		bpf_task_release(acquired);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("fentry.s/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
+int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_acquire_after_spin_unlock_explicit_rcu)
+{
+	struct task_kptr_lock_value *v;
+	struct task_struct *task, *acquired;
+	int key = 0;
+
+	v = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&task_kptr_lock_map, &key);
+	if (!v)
+		return 0;
+
+	bpf_rcu_read_lock();
+	bpf_spin_lock(&v->lock);
+	task = v->task;
+	bpf_spin_unlock(&v->lock);
+	if (task) {
+		acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task);
+		if (acquired)
+			bpf_task_release(acquired);
+	}
+	bpf_rcu_read_unlock();
+	return 0;
+}
+
 SEC("syscall")
 int test_task_from_vpid_current(const void *ctx)
 {
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-03 11:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-03 11:26 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Invalidate RCU pointers after final spin unlock Ning Ding
2026-08-03 11:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] " Ning Ding
2026-08-04  9:30   ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-03 11:26 ` Ning Ding [this message]
2026-08-04  9:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] " patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2026-08-04 10:50 ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-08-04 16:28   ` Paul E. McKenney

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=20260803112615.3362122-3-dingning04@gmail.com \
    --to=dingning04@gmail.com \
    --cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=utilityemal77@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