BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Masoud Aghasi <maghasi@disroot.org>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org,
	emil@etsalapatis.com, ihor.solodrai@linux.dev,
	leon.hwang@linux.dev, Masoud Aghasi <maghasi@disroot.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf v5 0/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags by percpu map updates
Date: Tue,  6 Oct 2026 09:46:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261006084604.780456-1-maghasi@disroot.org> (raw)

For BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY map, bpf_percpu_array_update()
is not considering the possibility of a combination of
(BPF_NOEXIST, BPF_EXIST) flags with (BPF_F_CPU, BPF_F_ALL_CPUS) flags.
This causes the (BPF_NOEXIST, BPF_EXIST) flags to lose their effect
in some cases.

For BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH and BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH maps,
htab_map_check_update_flags() and check_flags() are not considering
the possibility of a combination of (BPF_NOEXIST, BPF_EXIST) flags
with (BPF_F_CPU, BPF_F_ALL_CPUS) flags. This causes the
(BPF_NOEXIST, BPF_EXIST) flags to lose their effect in some cases.

For example, when using (BPF_F_CPU | BPF_EXIST) flag combination
with bpf_map_update_elem() on a BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH map, the
BPF_EXIST flag does not prevent new insertions as expected.

This series fixes the bug by adding proper flag validations and checks
and adds regression tests.

V5 changes:
- Simplify flag validations by introducing new macros in bpf.h
- Add helpers to verify the values after updates in the new tests
- Improve the style and structure of the new tests

V4 changes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20261004111007.3216186-1-maghasi@disroot.org/T/
- Edit selftest to use proper value_sz in the new cgroup map test
- Edit selftest to pin the current pid to the current cpu for LRU map
- Edit commit messages to include user-visible changes

V3 changes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20261003160213.2641506-1-maghasi@disroot.org/T/
- Split the fix into two separate patches for array map and hash maps
- Extend the selftest to cover all percpu map types
- Extend the selftest to cover all applicable flag combinations
- Extend the selftest to cover the unnecessary delete issue of LRU map

V2 changes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260930135753.1063495-1-maghasi@disroot.org/T/
- Fix a BPF_EXIST flag check in __htab_lru_percpu_map_update_elem()
- Add additional test for BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH map
- Add check for BPF_EXIST, BPF_NOEXIST combination in percpu array map

V1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260928102821.995214-1-maghasi@disroot.org/T/

Masoud Aghasi (3):
  bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags in bpf_percpu_array_update
  bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags by percpu hash map updates
  selftests/bpf: add tests for percpu map flags combination

 include/linux/bpf.h                           |   3 +
 kernel/bpf/arraymap.c                         |   6 +-
 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c                          |  10 +-
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/percpu_alloc.c   | 249 ++++++++++++++++++
 4 files changed, 261 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

-- 
2.47.3


             reply	other threads:[~2026-10-06  8:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-06  8:46 Masoud Aghasi [this message]
2026-10-06  8:46 ` [PATCH bpf v5 1/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags in bpf_percpu_array_update Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-06  9:16   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-10-07  2:43   ` Leon Hwang
2026-10-06  8:46 ` [PATCH bpf v5 2/3] bpf: Fix incorrect handling of user flags by percpu hash map updates Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-07  2:43   ` Leon Hwang
2026-10-06  8:46 ` [PATCH bpf v5 3/3] selftests/bpf: add tests for percpu map flags combination Masoud Aghasi
2026-10-07  2:44   ` Leon Hwang
2026-10-07 17:56     ` Masoud Aghasi

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=20261006084604.780456-1-maghasi@disroot.org \
    --to=maghasi@disroot.org \
    --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=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --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