public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Alexis Lothoré" <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
To: sashiko@lists.linux.dev,
	"Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)" <alexis.lothore@bootlin.com>
Cc: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 4/8] bpf, x86: add helper to emit kasan checks in x86 JITed programs
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2026 23:31:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <DI5YJZV8HWWA.2Y1YLSO42IH4D@bootlin.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260425054606.612E9C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org>

On Sat Apr 25, 2026 at 7:46 AM CEST, sashiko-bot wrote:
> Sashiko AI review found 3 potential issue(s):
> - [High] Missing call depth accounting for Retbleed mitigations leads to call depth counter underflow.
> - [Medium] BPF_ST instructions are incorrectly classified as memory reads instead of writes.
> - [Low] Flawed stack realignment logic wastes stack space.
> --

[...]

>> @@ -1301,6 +1305,95 @@ static void emit_store_stack_imm64(u8 **pprog, int reg, int stack_off, u64 imm64
>>  	emit_stx(pprog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, reg, stack_off);
>>  }
>>  
>> +static int emit_kasan_check(u8 **pprog, u32 addr_reg, struct bpf_insn *insn,
>> +			    u8 *ip, bool accesses_stack)
>> +{
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT_KASAN
>> +	bool is_write = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_STX;
>
> Does this code incorrectly classify BPF_ST instructions as memory reads?
>
> The BPF instruction set includes the BPF_ST class for storing immediate
> values into memory. Because BPF_CLASS(insn->code) for BPF_ST evaluates to
> 0x02, the is_write condition evaluates to false. This causes the helper to
> inject KASAN load checks instead of store checks, leading to inaccurate
> error reporting.

This helper is called in do_jit only for BPF_STX and BPF_LDX insns in the next
commit, so it will never wrongly classify wrongly a BPF_ST insn. But I
can add a comment, or even enforce a stricter check to make it
future-proof.

>> +	u32 bpf_size = BPF_SIZE(insn->code);
>> +	s32 off = insn->off;
>> +	u8 *prog = *pprog;
>> +	void *kasan_func;
>> +
>> +	if (accesses_stack)
>> +		return 0;
>> +
>> +	/* Derive KASAN check function from access type and size */
>> +	switch (bpf_size) {
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> +	/* Save r10 */
>> +	EMIT2(0x41, 0x52);
>> +	/* Save r11 */
>> +	EMIT2(0x41, 0x53);
>> +	/* We have pushed 72 bytes, realign stack to 16 bytes: sub rsp, 8 */
>> +	EMIT4(0x48, 0x83, 0xEC, 8);
>
> Is this stack realignment logic correct?
>
> The x86 BPF JIT prologue pushes a variable number of callee-saved registers
> and subtracts an 8-byte aligned stack_depth, meaning the stack pointer can
> be 8-byte misaligned prior to the check. If the stack is initially 8-byte
> misaligned, pushing 72 bytes and subtracting 8 preserves the 8-byte
> misalignment. Because the Linux kernel is compiled with 8-byte stack
> alignment, the sub rsp, 8 instruction seems unnecessary and wastes 8 bytes
> of stack space.

Hmmm, I have been assuming that stack was aligned when reaching the
emit_kasan_check, but indeed, as we could be anywhere in the prog, rsp
can already be misaligned. However, I understand for SytemV ABI, sec
3.2.2 that the stack must systematically be aligned on 16 bytes before
any function call. So I'll have to find a way to make this part a bit
smarter and add the alignment only if needed.

>> +
>> +	/* mov rdi, addr_reg */
>> +	EMIT_mov(BPF_REG_1, addr_reg);
>> +
>> +	/* add rdi, off (if offset is non-zero) */
>> +	if (off) {
>
> [ ... ]
>
>> +	/* Adjust ip to account for the instrumentation generated so far */
>> +	ip += (prog - *pprog);
>> +	/* call kasan_func */
>> +	if (emit_call(&prog, kasan_func, ip))
>> +		return -ERANGE;
>
> Does this call need call depth accounting for Retbleed mitigations?
>
> When CONFIG_CALL_DEPTH_TRACKING is enabled, every call instruction executed
> in the kernel must be properly accounted for to increment the call depth
> counter. Other dynamically emitted calls in the BPF JIT explicitly emit
> this tracking via x86_call_depth_emit_accounting() prior to emitting the
> actual call.
>
> By omitting this accounting, the call to the KASAN function will not
> increment the call depth counter. When the KASAN function returns, its
> return thunk will decrement the counter, causing it to underflow. This
> causes the return thunks to assume the Return Stack Buffer is empty and
> trigger expensive RSB stuffing on subsequent returns.

I completely missed out this (and that's likely not the only one). I'll
take a look into it.

Alexis

-- 
Alexis Lothoré, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com


  reply	other threads:[~2026-04-29 21:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-13 18:28 [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/8] bpf: add support for KASAN checks in JITed programs Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 1/8] kasan: expose generic kasan helpers Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-13 22:19   ` Andrey Konovalov
2026-04-14 13:12     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-14 14:36       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-14 15:10         ` Andrey Konovalov
2026-04-14 15:58           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-19 21:48             ` Andrey Konovalov
2026-04-19 22:51               ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-20 14:27                 ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-24 23:31                 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-04-14 18:41         ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-14 19:16           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-14 20:44             ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-25  3:13   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 2/8] bpf: mark instructions accessing program stack Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-24 23:18   ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-04-28 21:37     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-25  5:05   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 3/8] bpf: add BPF_JIT_KASAN for KASAN instrumentation of JITed programs Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-13 22:20   ` Andrey Konovalov
2026-04-14 13:24     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-14 14:38       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-25  5:18   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-29 21:04     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 4/8] bpf, x86: add helper to emit kasan checks in x86 " Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-25  5:46   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-29 21:31     ` Alexis Lothoré [this message]
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 5/8] bpf, x86: emit KASAN checks into " Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-25  6:08   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-29 21:59     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 6/8] selftests/bpf: do not run verifier JIT tests when BPF_JIT_KASAN is enabled Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-25  6:21   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 7/8] bpf, x86: enable KASAN for JITed programs on x86 Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-25  6:33   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-13 18:28 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 8/8] selftests/bpf: add tests to validate KASAN on JIT programs Alexis Lothoré (eBPF Foundation)
2026-04-13 22:20   ` Andrey Konovalov
2026-04-14 13:43     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-25  6:50   ` sashiko-bot
2026-04-24 23:10 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/8] bpf: add support for KASAN checks in JITed programs Ihor Solodrai
2026-04-24 23:28   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-04-27  8:54     ` Alexis Lothoré
2026-04-27  8:45   ` Alexis Lothoré

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=DI5YJZV8HWWA.2Y1YLSO42IH4D@bootlin.com \
    --to=alexis.lothore@bootlin.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sashiko@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