Re: R1 invalid mem access 'inv'

[Vincent Li <vincent.mc.li@gmail.com>]

Hi Yonghong,



On Fri, Jun 18, 2021 at 12:58 PM Vincent Li <vincent.mc.li@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Yonghong,
>
> I attached the full verifier log and BPF bytecode just in case it is
> obvious to you, if it is not, that is ok. I tried to make sense out of
> it and I failed due to my limited knowledge about BPF :)
>

I followed your clue on investigating how fp-200=pkt changed to
fp-200=inv in https://github.com/cilium/cilium/issues/16517#issuecomment-873522146
with previous attached complete bpf verifier log and bpf bytecode, it
eventually comes to following

0000000000004948 :
    2345: bf a3 00 00 00 00 00 00 r3 = r10
    2346: 07 03 00 00 d0 ff ff ff r3 += -48
    2347: b7 08 00 00 06 00 00 00 r8 = 6
; return ctx_store_bytes(ctx, off, mac, ETH_ALEN, 0);
    2348: bf 61 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r6
    2349: b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
    2350: b7 04 00 00 06 00 00 00 r4 = 6
    2351: b7 05 00 00 00 00 00 00 r5 = 0
    2352: 85 00 00 00 09 00 00 00 call 9
    2353: 67 00 00 00 20 00 00 00 r0 <<= 32
    2354: c7 00 00 00 20 00 00 00 r0 s>>= 32
; if (eth_store_daddr(ctx, (__u8 *) &vtep_mac.addr, 0) < 0)
    2355: c5 00 54 00 00 00 00 00 if r0 s< 0 goto +84

my new code is eth_store_daddr(ctx, (__u8 *) &vtep_mac.addr, 0) < 0;
that is what i copied from other part of cilium code, eth_store_daddr
is:

static __always_inline int eth_store_daddr(struct __ctx_buff *ctx,

                                           const __u8 *mac, int off)
{
#if !CTX_DIRECT_WRITE_OK
        return eth_store_daddr_aligned(ctx, mac, off);
#else
......
}

and eth_store_daddr_aligned is

static __always_inline int eth_store_daddr_aligned(struct __ctx_buff *ctx,

                                                   const __u8 *mac, int off)
{
        return ctx_store_bytes(ctx, off, mac, ETH_ALEN, 0);
}

Joe  from Cilium raised an interesting question on why the compiler
put ctx_store_bytes() before  if (eth_store_daddr(ctx, (__u8 *)
&vtep_mac.addr, 0) < 0),
that seems to have  fp-200=pkt changed to fp-200=inv, and indeed if I
skip the eth_store_daddr_aligned call, the issue is resolved, do you
have clue on why compiler does that?

I have more follow-up in https://github.com/cilium/cilium/issues/16517
if you are interested to know the full picture.

Appreciate it very much if you have time to look at it :)

Vincent