From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Amery Hung" <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/15] bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period optional
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2026 20:30:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260917203039.584D81F000FF@smtp.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260917200542.3689605-3-ameryhung@gmail.com>
Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] bpf: Use-After-Free of struct_ops map due to RCU ordering violation
--
commit c2c7b791d71f80e6fb709587eda6dfcc6d96d460
Author: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period optional
bpf_struct_ops_map_free() currently waits for both a regular RCU grace
period and a tasks RCU grace period for every struct_ops map through
synchronize_rcu_mult(call_rcu, call_rcu_tasks).
Add a map_free_pre_rcu() callback so the struct_ops map can remove
ksyms before bpf_map_put() wait for the regular rcu grace period.
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> index 3935bf35a4237..7802859eac1ea 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
> @@ -1037,24 +1046,8 @@ static void bpf_struct_ops_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
>
> bpf_struct_ops_map_dissoc_progs(st_map);
[Severity: Medium]
Since map->free_after_rcu_gp = true is now set in bpf_struct_ops_map_alloc(),
this function executes after the regular RCU grace period. This means
prog->aux->st_ops_assoc is only cleared after the grace period ends.
Does this violate the RCU 'remove before reclaim' invariant?
A BPF program executing after the RCU grace period (for example, via
bpf_prog_test_run()) can read the stale pointer in
bpf_prog_get_assoc_struct_ops():
kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c:bpf_prog_get_assoc_struct_ops() {
...
st_ops_assoc = rcu_dereference_check(aux->st_ops_assoc, bpf_rcu_lock_held());
...
}
Because the pointer hasn't been cleared yet, the program will read the stale
map pointer, leading to a Use-After-Free when this workqueue subsequently
frees the map.
Can this be exploited using bpf_dummy_ops by closing the map to
trigger the RCU grace period and calling bpf_prog_test_run(prog_fd) exactly
after the grace period ends?
> - bpf_struct_ops_map_del_ksyms(st_map);
> -
> - /* The struct_ops's function may switch to another struct_ops.
[ ... ]
> @@ -1163,6 +1156,7 @@ static struct bpf_map *bpf_struct_ops_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>
> mutex_init(&st_map->lock);
> bpf_map_init_from_attr(map, attr);
> + map->free_after_rcu_gp = true;
[Severity: Medium]
Setting this flag shifts the RCU grace period to occur asynchronously before
the map free workqueue executes, which causes the aforementioned Use-After-Free
issue.
Should bpf_struct_ops_map_dissoc_progs() be called in
bpf_struct_ops_map_free_pre_rcu() instead to ensure the RCU pointer is
cleared before the grace period begins?
>
> return map;
--
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260917200542.3689605-1-ameryhung@gmail.com?part=2
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-17 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-17 20:05 [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] bpf: A common way to attach struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/15] bpf: Remove __rcu tagging in st_link->map Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/15] bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period optional Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:30 ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/15] bpf: Add bpf_struct_ops accessor helpers Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:18 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 21:16 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/15] bpf: Remove unnecessary prog_list_prog() check Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/15] bpf: Replace prog_list_prog() check with direct pl->prog and pl->link check Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/15] bpf: Add prog_list_init_item(), prog_list_replace_item(), and prog_list_id() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/15] bpf: Move LSM trampoline unlink into bpf_cgroup_link_auto_detach() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/15] bpf: Add a few bpf_cgroup_array_* helper functions Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/15] bpf: Add infrastructure to support attaching struct_ops to cgroups Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/15] bpf: Allow all struct_ops to use bpf_dynptr_from_skb() Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 11/15] bpf: tcp: Support selected sock_ops callbacks as struct_ops Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/15] bpf: tcp: Support parse/len/write header option hooks in bpf_tcp_ops Amery Hung
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 13/15] libbpf: Support attaching struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/15] selftests/bpf: Test " Amery Hung
2026-09-17 20:23 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-17 21:34 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-17 20:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 15/15] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_tcp_ops header option hooks Amery Hung
2026-09-19 5:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] bpf: A common way to attach struct_ops to a cgroup 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=20260917203039.584D81F000FF@smtp.kernel.org \
--to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.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