* [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
@ 2025-11-05 15:14 Leon Hwang
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] " Leon Hwang
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the " Leon Hwang
0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Leon Hwang @ 2025-11-05 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, yonghong.song,
john.fastabend, kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung,
linux-kernel, kernel-patches-bot, Leon Hwang
In the discussion thread
"[PATCH bpf-next v9 0/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags for percpu maps"[1],
it was pointed out that missing calls to bpf_obj_free_fields() could
lead to memory leaks.
A selftest was added to confirm that this is indeed a real issue - the
refcount of BPF_KPTR_REF field is not decremented when
bpf_obj_free_fields() is missing after copy_map_value[,_long]().
Further inspection of copy_map_value[,_long]() call sites revealed two
locations affected by this issue:
1. pcpu_copy_value()
2. htab_map_update_elem() when used with BPF_F_LOCK
Similar case happens when update local storage maps with BPF_F_LOCK.
This series fixes the cases where BPF_F_LOCK is not involved by
properly calling bpf_obj_free_fields() after copy_map_value[,_long](),
and adds a selftest to verify the fix.
The remaining cases involving BPF_F_LOCK will be addressed in a
separate patch set after the series
"bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags for percpu maps"
is applied.
Changes:
v5 -> v6:
* Update the test name to include "refcounted_kptr".
* Update some local variables' name in the test (per Alexei).
* v5: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251104142714.99878-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/
v4 -> v5:
* Use a local variable to store the this_cpu_ptr()/per_cpu_ptr() result,
and reuse it between copy_map_value[,_long]() and
bpf_obj_free_fields() in patch #1 (per Andrii).
* Drop patch #2 and #3, because the combination of BPF_F_LOCK with other
special fields (except for BPF_SPIN_LOCK) will be disallowed on the
UAPI side in the future (per Alexei).
* v4: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251030152451.62778-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/
v3 -> v4:
* Target bpf-next tree.
* Address comments from Amery:
* Drop 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' in the path of updating local storage
maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
* Drop the corresponding self test.
* Respin the other test of local storage maps using syscall BPF
programs.
* v3: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251026154000.34151-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/
v2 -> v3:
* Free special fields when update local storage maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
* Add test to verify decrementing refcount when update cgroup local
storage maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
* Address review from AI bot:
* Slow path with BPF_F_LOCK (around line 642-646) in
'bpf_local_storage.c'.
* v2: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251020164608.20536-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/
v1 -> v2:
* Add test to verify decrementing refcount when update cgroup local
storage maps with BPF_F_LOCK.
* Address review from AI bot:
* Fast path without bucket lock (around line 610) in
'bpf_local_storage.c'.
* v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251016145801.47552-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/
Leon Hwang (2):
bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when
update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
kernel/bpf/hashtab.c | 10 +++-
.../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
--
2.51.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-05 15:14 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-05 15:14 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-07 1:56 ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the " Leon Hwang
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Leon Hwang @ 2025-11-05 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, yonghong.song,
john.fastabend, kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung,
linux-kernel, kernel-patches-bot, Leon Hwang
As [lru_,]percpu_hash maps support BPF_KPTR_{REF,PERCPU}, missing
calls to 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' in 'pcpu_copy_value()' could cause the
memory referenced by BPF_KPTR_{REF,PERCPU} fields to be held until the
map gets freed.
Fix this by calling 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' after
'copy_map_value[,_long]()' in 'pcpu_copy_value()'.
Fixes: 65334e64a493 ("bpf: Support kptrs in percpu hashmap and percpu LRU hashmap")
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
kernel/bpf/hashtab.c | 10 ++++++++--
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
index f876f09355f0d..c8a9b27f8663b 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
@@ -934,15 +934,21 @@ static void free_htab_elem(struct bpf_htab *htab, struct htab_elem *l)
static void pcpu_copy_value(struct bpf_htab *htab, void __percpu *pptr,
void *value, bool onallcpus)
{
+ void *ptr;
+
if (!onallcpus) {
/* copy true value_size bytes */
- copy_map_value(&htab->map, this_cpu_ptr(pptr), value);
+ ptr = this_cpu_ptr(pptr);
+ copy_map_value(&htab->map, ptr, value);
+ bpf_obj_free_fields(htab->map.record, ptr);
} else {
u32 size = round_up(htab->map.value_size, 8);
int off = 0, cpu;
for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
- copy_map_value_long(&htab->map, per_cpu_ptr(pptr, cpu), value + off);
+ ptr = per_cpu_ptr(pptr, cpu);
+ copy_map_value_long(&htab->map, ptr, value + off);
+ bpf_obj_free_fields(htab->map.record, ptr);
off += size;
}
}
--
2.51.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-05 15:14 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] " Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-05 15:14 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-07 2:00 ` Yonghong Song
1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Leon Hwang @ 2025-11-05 15:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, yonghong.song,
john.fastabend, kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung,
linux-kernel, kernel-patches-bot, Leon Hwang
Add test to verify that updating [lru_,]percpu_hash maps decrements
refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
The tests perform the following steps:
1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
4. Add the node to a linked list.
5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
index d6bd5e16e6372..086f679fa3f61 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
@@ -44,3 +44,60 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
}
+
+void test_percpu_hash_refcounted_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
+{
+ struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
+ int cpu_nr, fd, err, key = 0;
+ struct bpf_map *map;
+ size_t values_sz;
+ u64 *values;
+ LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
+ .data_in = &pkt_v4,
+ .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
+ .repeat = 1,
+ );
+
+ cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
+ if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
+ return;
+
+ values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
+ return;
+
+ skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
+ free(values);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
+ memset(values, 0, values_sz);
+
+ map = skel->maps.percpu_hash;
+ err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, 0);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
+ goto out;
+
+ fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.percpu_hash_refcount_leak);
+ err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
+ goto out;
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 2, "opts.retval"))
+ goto out;
+
+ err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, 0);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
+ goto out;
+
+ fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.check_percpu_hash_refcount);
+ err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
+ ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 1, "opts.retval");
+
+out:
+ refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
+ free(values);
+}
+
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
index 893a4fdb4b6e9..1aca85d86aebc 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
@@ -568,4 +568,64 @@ int BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
return 0;
}
+private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
+
+static int probe_read_refcount(void)
+{
+ u32 refcount;
+
+ bpf_probe_read_kernel(&refcount, sizeof(refcount), (void *) ref);
+ return refcount;
+}
+
+static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct bpf_spin_lock *lock,
+ struct node_data __kptr **node)
+{
+ struct node_data *node_new, *node_ref, *node_old;
+
+ node_new = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*node_new));
+ if (!node_new)
+ return -1;
+
+ node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
+ node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
+ if (node_old) {
+ bpf_obj_drop(node_old);
+ bpf_obj_drop(node_ref);
+ return -2;
+ }
+
+ bpf_spin_lock(lock);
+ bpf_list_push_front(head, &node_ref->l);
+ ref = (u64)(void *) &node_ref->ref;
+ bpf_spin_unlock(lock);
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
+struct {
+ __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH);
+ __type(key, int);
+ __type(value, struct map_value);
+ __uint(max_entries, 1);
+} percpu_hash SEC(".maps");
+
+SEC("tc")
+int percpu_hash_refcount_leak(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct map_value *v;
+ int key = 0;
+
+ v = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&percpu_hash, &key);
+ if (!v)
+ return 0;
+
+ return __insert_in_list(&head, &lock, &v->node);
+}
+
+SEC("tc")
+int check_percpu_hash_refcount(void *ctx)
+{
+ return probe_read_refcount();
+}
+
char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
--
2.51.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] " Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-07 1:56 ` Yonghong Song
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2025-11-07 1:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leon Hwang, bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, john.fastabend,
kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung, linux-kernel,
kernel-patches-bot
On 11/5/25 7:14 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
> As [lru_,]percpu_hash maps support BPF_KPTR_{REF,PERCPU}, missing
> calls to 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' in 'pcpu_copy_value()' could cause the
> memory referenced by BPF_KPTR_{REF,PERCPU} fields to be held until the
> map gets freed.
>
> Fix this by calling 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' after
> 'copy_map_value[,_long]()' in 'pcpu_copy_value()'.
>
> Fixes: 65334e64a493 ("bpf: Support kptrs in percpu hashmap and percpu LRU hashmap")
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the " Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-07 2:00 ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-11 13:38 ` Leon Hwang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2025-11-07 2:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leon Hwang, bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, john.fastabend,
kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung, linux-kernel,
kernel-patches-bot
On 11/5/25 7:14 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
> Add test to verify that updating [lru_,]percpu_hash maps decrements
> refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
>
> The tests perform the following steps:
>
> 1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
> 2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
> 3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
> 4. Add the node to a linked list.
> 5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
> 6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
> 7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
LGTM with a few nits below.
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
> ---
> .../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
> index d6bd5e16e6372..086f679fa3f61 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
> @@ -44,3 +44,60 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
> ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
> refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
> }
> +
> +void test_percpu_hash_refcounted_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
> +{
> + struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
> + int cpu_nr, fd, err, key = 0;
> + struct bpf_map *map;
> + size_t values_sz;
> + u64 *values;
> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
> + .repeat = 1,
> + );
> +
> + cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
> + if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
> + return;
> +
> + values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
> + return;
> +
> + skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
> + free(values);
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
> + memset(values, 0, values_sz);
> +
> + map = skel->maps.percpu_hash;
> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, 0);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
> + goto out;
> +
> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.percpu_hash_refcount_leak);
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
> + goto out;
> + if (!ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 2, "opts.retval"))
> + goto out;
> +
> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values, values_sz, 0);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
> + goto out;
> +
> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.check_percpu_hash_refcount);
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
> + ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
> + ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 1, "opts.retval");
> +
> +out:
> + refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
> + free(values);
> +}
> +
Empty line here.
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
> index 893a4fdb4b6e9..1aca85d86aebc 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
> @@ -568,4 +568,64 @@ int BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
> +
> +static int probe_read_refcount(void)
> +{
> + u32 refcount;
> +
> + bpf_probe_read_kernel(&refcount, sizeof(refcount), (void *) ref);
> + return refcount;
> +}
> +
> +static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct bpf_spin_lock *lock,
> + struct node_data __kptr **node)
> +{
> + struct node_data *node_new, *node_ref, *node_old;
> +
> + node_new = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*node_new));
> + if (!node_new)
> + return -1;
> +
> + node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
> + node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
Change the above to node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_node_ref); might
be better for reasoning although node_ref/node_new are the same.
> + if (node_old) {
> + bpf_obj_drop(node_old);
> + bpf_obj_drop(node_ref);
> + return -2;
> + }
> +
> + bpf_spin_lock(lock);
> + bpf_list_push_front(head, &node_ref->l);
> + ref = (u64)(void *) &node_ref->ref;
> + bpf_spin_unlock(lock);
> + return probe_read_refcount();
> +}
> +
> +struct {
> + __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH);
> + __type(key, int);
> + __type(value, struct map_value);
> + __uint(max_entries, 1);
> +} percpu_hash SEC(".maps");
> +
> +SEC("tc")
> +int percpu_hash_refcount_leak(void *ctx)
> +{
> + struct map_value *v;
> + int key = 0;
> +
> + v = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&percpu_hash, &key);
> + if (!v)
> + return 0;
> +
> + return __insert_in_list(&head, &lock, &v->node);
> +}
> +
> +SEC("tc")
> +int check_percpu_hash_refcount(void *ctx)
> +{
> + return probe_read_refcount();
> +}
> +
> char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-07 2:00 ` Yonghong Song
@ 2025-11-11 13:38 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 13:52 ` Leon Hwang
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Leon Hwang @ 2025-11-11 13:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yonghong Song, bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, john.fastabend,
kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung, linux-kernel,
kernel-patches-bot
On 2025/11/7 10:00, Yonghong Song wrote:
>
>
> On 11/5/25 7:14 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
>> Add test to verify that updating [lru_,]percpu_hash maps decrements
>> refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
>>
>> The tests perform the following steps:
>>
>> 1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
>> 2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
>> 3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
>> 4. Add the node to a linked list.
>> 5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
>> 6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
>> 7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
>
> LGTM with a few nits below.
>
> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
>
Hi Yonghong,
Thanks for your review and ack.
>> ---
>> .../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
>> .../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
>> 2 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>> index d6bd5e16e6372..086f679fa3f61 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>> @@ -44,3 +44,60 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
>> ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
>> refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>> }
>> +
>> +void test_percpu_hash_refcounted_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
>> +{
>> + struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
>> + int cpu_nr, fd, err, key = 0;
>> + struct bpf_map *map;
>> + size_t values_sz;
>> + u64 *values;
>> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
>> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
>> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
>> + .repeat = 1,
>> + );
>> +
>> + cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
>> + if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
>> + free(values);
>> + return;
>> + }
>> +
>> + values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
>> + memset(values, 0, values_sz);
>> +
>> + map = skel->maps.percpu_hash;
>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>> values_sz, 0);
>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>> + goto out;
>> +
>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.percpu_hash_refcount_leak);
>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
>> + goto out;
>> + if (!ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 2, "opts.retval"))
>> + goto out;
>> +
>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>> values_sz, 0);
>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>> + goto out;
>> +
>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.check_percpu_hash_refcount);
>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>> + ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
>> + ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 1, "opts.retval");
>> +
>> +out:
>> + refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>> + free(values);
>> +}
>> +
>
> Empty line here.
>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/
>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>> index 893a4fdb4b6e9..1aca85d86aebc 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>> @@ -568,4 +568,64 @@ int
>> BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
>> return 0;
>> }
>> +private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
>> +
>> +static int probe_read_refcount(void)
>> +{
>> + u32 refcount;
>> +
>> + bpf_probe_read_kernel(&refcount, sizeof(refcount), (void *) ref);
>> + return refcount;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct
>> bpf_spin_lock *lock,
>> + struct node_data __kptr **node)
>> +{
>> + struct node_data *node_new, *node_ref, *node_old;
>> +
>> + node_new = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*node_new));
>> + if (!node_new)
>> + return -1;
>> +
>> + node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
>> + node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
>
> Change the above to node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_node_ref); might
> be better for reasoning although node_ref/node_new are the same.
>
Nope — node_ref and node_new are different for the verifier.
When trying node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_ref), the verifier reported:
[verifier log snipped for brevity...]
; bpf_obj_drop(node_ref); @ refcounted_kptr.c:594
26: (bf) r1 = r6 ; R1=scalar(id=7) R6=scalar(id=7)
refs=3
27: (b7) r2 = 0 ; R2=0 refs=3
28: (85) call bpf_obj_drop_impl#54490
R1 must be referenced or trusted
processed 27 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2
peak_states 2 mark_read 0
So the verifier rejected it because R6 became scalar(id=7) from
ptr_node_data(ref_obj_id=4).
---
Hi Alexei, could you please drop the extra empty line when applying this
patch?
Then I don't need to send another revision.
Thanks,
Leon
[...]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-11 13:38 ` Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-11 13:52 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 21:58 ` Yonghong Song
0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Leon Hwang @ 2025-11-11 13:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Yonghong Song, bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, john.fastabend,
kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung, linux-kernel,
kernel-patches-bot
On 2025/11/11 21:38, Leon Hwang wrote:
>
>
> On 2025/11/7 10:00, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 11/5/25 7:14 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
>>> Add test to verify that updating [lru_,]percpu_hash maps decrements
>>> refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
>>>
>>> The tests perform the following steps:
>>>
>>> 1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
>>> 2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
>>> 3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
>>> 4. Add the node to a linked list.
>>> 5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
>>> 6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
>>> 7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
>>
>> LGTM with a few nits below.
>>
>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
>>
>
> Hi Yonghong,
>
> Thanks for your review and ack.
>
>>> ---
>>> .../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
>>> .../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
>>> 2 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> index d6bd5e16e6372..086f679fa3f61 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> @@ -44,3 +44,60 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
>>> ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
>>> refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>>> }
>>> +
>>> +void test_percpu_hash_refcounted_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
>>> +{
>>> + struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
>>> + int cpu_nr, fd, err, key = 0;
>>> + struct bpf_map *map;
>>> + size_t values_sz;
>>> + u64 *values;
>>> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
>>> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
>>> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
>>> + .repeat = 1,
>>> + );
>>> +
>>> + cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
>>> + if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
>>> + return;
>>> +
>>> + skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
>>> + free(values);
>>> + return;
>>> + }
>>> +
>>> + values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
>>> + memset(values, 0, values_sz);
>>> +
>>> + map = skel->maps.percpu_hash;
>>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>>> values_sz, 0);
>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.percpu_hash_refcount_leak);
>>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
>>> + goto out;
>>> + if (!ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 2, "opts.retval"))
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>>> values_sz, 0);
>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>>> + goto out;
>>> +
>>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.check_percpu_hash_refcount);
>>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>>> + ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
>>> + ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 1, "opts.retval");
>>> +
>>> +out:
>>> + refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>>> + free(values);
>>> +}
>>> +
>>
>> Empty line here.
>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/
>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> index 893a4fdb4b6e9..1aca85d86aebc 100644
>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>> @@ -568,4 +568,64 @@ int
>>> BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
>>> return 0;
>>> }
>>> +private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
>>> +
>>> +static int probe_read_refcount(void)
>>> +{
>>> + u32 refcount;
>>> +
>>> + bpf_probe_read_kernel(&refcount, sizeof(refcount), (void *) ref);
>>> + return refcount;
>>> +}
>>> +
>>> +static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct
>>> bpf_spin_lock *lock,
>>> + struct node_data __kptr **node)
>>> +{
>>> + struct node_data *node_new, *node_ref, *node_old;
>>> +
>>> + node_new = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*node_new));
>>> + if (!node_new)
>>> + return -1;
>>> +
>>> + node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
>>> + node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
>>
>> Change the above to node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_node_ref); might
>> be better for reasoning although node_ref/node_new are the same.
>>
>
> Nope — node_ref and node_new are different for the verifier.
They are the same in theory.
The verifier failure was likely caused by something else, but I'm not
sure of the exact reason.
>
> When trying node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_ref), the verifier reported:
>
> [verifier log snipped for brevity...]
> ; bpf_obj_drop(node_ref); @ refcounted_kptr.c:594
> 26: (bf) r1 = r6 ; R1=scalar(id=7) R6=scalar(id=7)
> refs=3
> 27: (b7) r2 = 0 ; R2=0 refs=3
> 28: (85) call bpf_obj_drop_impl#54490
> R1 must be referenced or trusted
> processed 27 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2
> peak_states 2 mark_read 0
>
> So the verifier rejected it because R6 became scalar(id=7) from
> ptr_node_data(ref_obj_id=4).
>
> ---
>
> Hi Alexei, could you please drop the extra empty line when applying this
> patch?
>
> Then I don't need to send another revision.
>
> Thanks,
> Leon
>
> [...]
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
2025-11-11 13:52 ` Leon Hwang
@ 2025-11-11 21:58 ` Yonghong Song
0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2025-11-11 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Leon Hwang, bpf
Cc: ast, andrii, daniel, martin.lau, eddyz87, song, john.fastabend,
kpsingh, sdf, haoluo, jolsa, memxor, ameryhung, linux-kernel,
kernel-patches-bot
On 11/11/25 5:52 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
>
> On 2025/11/11 21:38, Leon Hwang wrote:
>>
>> On 2025/11/7 10:00, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>
>>> On 11/5/25 7:14 AM, Leon Hwang wrote:
>>>> Add test to verify that updating [lru_,]percpu_hash maps decrements
>>>> refcount when BPF_KPTR_REF objects are involved.
>>>>
>>>> The tests perform the following steps:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Call update_elem() to insert an initial value.
>>>> 2. Use bpf_refcount_acquire() to increment the refcount.
>>>> 3. Store the node pointer in the map value.
>>>> 4. Add the node to a linked list.
>>>> 5. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *2*.
>>>> 6. Call update_elem() again to trigger refcount decrement.
>>>> 7. Probe-read the refcount and verify it is *1*.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
>>> LGTM with a few nits below.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
>>>
>> Hi Yonghong,
>>
>> Thanks for your review and ack.
>>
>>>> ---
>>>> .../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
>>>> .../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
>>>> 2 files changed, 117 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> index d6bd5e16e6372..086f679fa3f61 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> @@ -44,3 +44,60 @@ void test_refcounted_kptr_wrong_owner(void)
>>>> ASSERT_OK(opts.retval, "rbtree_wrong_owner_remove_fail_a2 retval");
>>>> refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>>>> }
>>>> +
>>>> +void test_percpu_hash_refcounted_kptr_refcount_leak(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct refcounted_kptr *skel;
>>>> + int cpu_nr, fd, err, key = 0;
>>>> + struct bpf_map *map;
>>>> + size_t values_sz;
>>>> + u64 *values;
>>>> + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
>>>> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
>>>> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
>>>> + .repeat = 1,
>>>> + );
>>>> +
>>>> + cpu_nr = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_GT(cpu_nr, 0, "libbpf_num_possible_cpus"))
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + values = calloc(cpu_nr, sizeof(u64));
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(values, "calloc values"))
>>>> + return;
>>>> +
>>>> + skel = refcounted_kptr__open_and_load();
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "refcounted_kptr__open_and_load")) {
>>>> + free(values);
>>>> + return;
>>>> + }
>>>> +
>>>> + values_sz = cpu_nr * sizeof(u64);
>>>> + memset(values, 0, values_sz);
>>>> +
>>>> + map = skel->maps.percpu_hash;
>>>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>>>> values_sz, 0);
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> +
>>>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.percpu_hash_refcount_leak);
>>>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts"))
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 2, "opts.retval"))
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> +
>>>> + err = bpf_map__update_elem(map, &key, sizeof(key), values,
>>>> values_sz, 0);
>>>> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_map__update_elem"))
>>>> + goto out;
>>>> +
>>>> + fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.check_percpu_hash_refcount);
>>>> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(fd, &opts);
>>>> + ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
>>>> + ASSERT_EQ(opts.retval, 1, "opts.retval");
>>>> +
>>>> +out:
>>>> + refcounted_kptr__destroy(skel);
>>>> + free(values);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>> Empty line here.
>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c b/
>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> index 893a4fdb4b6e9..1aca85d86aebc 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c
>>>> @@ -568,4 +568,64 @@ int
>>>> BPF_PROG(rbtree_sleepable_rcu_no_explicit_rcu_lock,
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>> +private(kptr_ref) u64 ref;
>>>> +
>>>> +static int probe_read_refcount(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u32 refcount;
>>>> +
>>>> + bpf_probe_read_kernel(&refcount, sizeof(refcount), (void *) ref);
>>>> + return refcount;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static int __insert_in_list(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct
>>>> bpf_spin_lock *lock,
>>>> + struct node_data __kptr **node)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct node_data *node_new, *node_ref, *node_old;
>>>> +
>>>> + node_new = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*node_new));
>>>> + if (!node_new)
>>>> + return -1;
>>>> +
>>>> + node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
>>>> + node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
>>> Change the above to node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_node_ref); might
>>> be better for reasoning although node_ref/node_new are the same.
>>>
>> Nope — node_ref and node_new are different for the verifier.
> They are the same in theory.
>
> The verifier failure was likely caused by something else, but I'm not
> sure of the exact reason.
I did some analysis and your code works as expected:
node_ref = bpf_refcount_acquire(node_new);
node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
if (node_old) {
bpf_obj_drop(node_old);
bpf_obj_drop(node_ref);
return -2;
}
bpf_spin_lock(lock);
bpf_list_push_front(head, &node_ref->l);
ref = (u64)(void *) &node_ref->ref;
bpf_spin_unlock(lock);
In the above, after the following insn:
node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
the second argument 'node_new' will become a scalar since it
may be changed by another bpf program accessing the same map.
So your code is okay as node_ref still valid ptr_node_data
and can be used in following codes.
My suggestion to replace
node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_new);
with
node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_ref);
will not work since node_ref will be a scalar
so subsequent bpf_obj_drop(node_ref) and bpf_list_push_front(...)
won't work.
In summary, your change look okay to me. Sorry for noise.
>
>> When trying node_old = bpf_kptr_xchg(node, node_ref), the verifier reported:
>>
>> [verifier log snipped for brevity...]
>> ; bpf_obj_drop(node_ref); @ refcounted_kptr.c:594
>> 26: (bf) r1 = r6 ; R1=scalar(id=7) R6=scalar(id=7)
>> refs=3
>> 27: (b7) r2 = 0 ; R2=0 refs=3
>> 28: (85) call bpf_obj_drop_impl#54490
>> R1 must be referenced or trusted
>> processed 27 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 2
>> peak_states 2 mark_read 0
>>
>> So the verifier rejected it because R6 became scalar(id=7) from
>> ptr_node_data(ref_obj_id=4).
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Hi Alexei, could you please drop the extra empty line when applying this
>> patch?
>>
>> Then I don't need to send another revision.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Leon
>>
>> [...]
>>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2025-11-11 21:58 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2025-11-05 15:14 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] " Leon Hwang
2025-11-07 1:56 ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the " Leon Hwang
2025-11-07 2:00 ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-11 13:38 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 13:52 ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 21:58 ` Yonghong Song
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).