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>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v5 05/11] bpf: Account R2 of register-pair returns in live register analysis
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2026 13:02:35 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260813200235.1995574-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260813200210.1991507-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>
A BPF_EXIT of a subprogram returning a value larger than 8 bytes (a
struct/union or an __int128) reads R2 as well as R0, since the second half
of the return value is passed back in R2. compute_insn_live_regs() only
marked R0 used at exit, so a callee's R2 could be considered dead and
cleaned from checkpointed states, which would allow unsound state pruning.
Mark R2 as read at the BPF_EXIT of a subprogram that does return a register
pair. bpf_compute_live_registers() now loops over the subprograms and, for
each, over the [start, end) instruction range from env->subprog_info[], so
the return convention is queried once per subprogram through
bpf_ret_reg_pair() rather than once per instruction.
Marking R2 at every exit instead would be simpler, but R2 would then stay
live backwards across any call that is not followed by a write to R2, which
is nearly every program, and would needlessly hurt state pruning.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
kernel/bpf/liveness.c | 20 ++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/liveness.c b/kernel/bpf/liveness.c
index 74fc4b3f80d6..71f998c6eb88 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/liveness.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/liveness.c
@@ -2060,7 +2060,8 @@ static inline u16 mask_hi(u32 m) { return (u16)(m >> 16); }
/* Compute info->{use,def} fields for the instruction */
static void compute_insn_live_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
struct bpf_insn *insn,
- struct insn_live_regs *info)
+ struct insn_live_regs *info,
+ bool ret_reg_pair)
{
struct bpf_call_summary cs;
const u8 class = BPF_CLASS(insn->code);
@@ -2072,6 +2073,7 @@ static void compute_insn_live_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const u32 src32 = mask_lo(src);
const u32 dst32 = mask_lo(dst);
const u32 r0 = reg64_mask(0);
+ const u32 r2 = reg64_mask(BPF_REG_2);
u32 def = 0;
u32 use = U32_MAX;
@@ -2191,7 +2193,7 @@ static void compute_insn_live_regs(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
break;
case BPF_EXIT:
def = 0;
- use = r0;
+ use = ret_reg_pair ? (r0 | r2) : r0;
break;
case BPF_CALL:
def = ALL_CALLER_SAVED_REGS;
@@ -2228,8 +2230,8 @@ int bpf_compute_live_registers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
struct insn_live_regs *state;
int insn_cnt = env->prog->len;
u64 pos, insn_pos;
- int err = 0, i, j;
- bool changed;
+ int err = 0, i, j, subprog, start, end;
+ bool changed, ret_reg_pair;
/* Use the following algorithm:
* - define the following:
@@ -2256,8 +2258,14 @@ int bpf_compute_live_registers(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
goto out;
}
- for (i = 0; i < insn_cnt; ++i)
- compute_insn_live_regs(env, &insns[i], &state[i]);
+ for (subprog = 0; subprog < env->subprog_cnt; subprog++) {
+ start = env->subprog_info[subprog].start;
+ end = env->subprog_info[subprog + 1].start;
+ ret_reg_pair = bpf_ret_reg_pair(env, subprog);
+
+ for (i = start; i < end; ++i)
+ compute_insn_live_regs(env, &insns[i], &state[i], ret_reg_pair);
+ }
/* Forward pass: resolve stack access through FP-derived pointers */
err = bpf_compute_subprog_arg_access(env);
--
2.53.0-Meta
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-13 20:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-13 20:02 [PATCH bpf-next v5 00/11] bpf: Support aggregate return values up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 01/11] bpf: Factor check_global_ret_scalar_reg() out of the global return check Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 02/11] bpf: Add helpers to describe the R0:R2 return register pair Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 21:11 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 03/11] bpf: Wire up JIT support for 16-byte kfunc returns Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 04/11] bpf: Track R2 of register-pair returns in precision backtracking Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:49 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:02 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 06/11] bpf: Add verifier support for 16-byte returns in R0:R2 Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 21:11 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 07/11] bpf: Enable aggregate return types up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 08/11] bpf: Reject register-pair returns when the subprog BTF is unreliable Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 20:49 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:02 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 09/11] selftests/bpf: Add C tests for 16-byte returns in R0:R2 Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 21:11 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 10/11] selftests/bpf: Add inline-asm and subprog tests for R0:R2 returns Yonghong Song
2026-08-13 21:11 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-13 20:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v5 11/11] Documentation/bpf: Document up to 16-byte kfunc return values in R0:R2 Yonghong Song
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=20260813200235.1995574-1-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=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.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