From: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next] bpf: fix uninitialized values in BPF_{CORE,PROBE}_READ
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2025 16:33:46 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aBJQ6lsZfg8xlM5e@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzYeKLgqn+yq3Mt+Vv-9t6qmzQqimb31zD=y-Cw474LU5w@mail.gmail.com>
On 25/04/30 09:00AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2025 at 7:19 AM Anton Protopopov
> <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > With the latest LLVM bpf selftests build will fail with
> > the following error message:
> >
> > progs/profiler.inc.h:710:31: error: default initialization of an object of type 'typeof ((parent_task)->real_cred->uid.val)' (aka 'const unsigned int') leaves the object uninitialized and is incompatible with C++ [-Werror,-Wdefault-const-init-unsafe]
>
> this is BPF-side code, what does C++ have to do with this, I'm confused...
This I am not sure about why exactly, but clang (wihout ++) emits this warning
now (try smth like `clang -c -x c - <<<'void foo(void) {const int x;}'`).
When sending patch, I though that CORE* macros also can be used by ++ progs.
For C, maybe, this is a problem with clang that it enables -Wdefault-const-init-unsafe?
>
> Also, why using __u8[] is suddenly ok, and using the actual type
> isn't? Eventually it all is initialized by bpf_probe_read_kernel(), so
> compiler is wrong or I am misunderstanding something... Can you please
> help me understand this?
So, when a const sneaks in, one have BPF_CORE_READ expanded into
say smth like this:
({
typeof(((parent_task)->real_cred->uid.val)) __r;
BPF_CORE_READ_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__);
__r;
})
It happens that real_cred is a pointer to const, so __r becomes const,
and thus the warning (if enabled) is legit.
With __u8 this turns into (let T = typeof(((parent_task)->real_cred->uid.val)))
({
__u8 __r[sizeof(T)];
BPF_CORE_READ_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__);
* (T *) __r;
})
So here we do not care if T is const or not, as __r is not in any case.
>
> > 710 | proc_exec_data->parent_uid = BPF_CORE_READ(parent_task, real_cred, uid.val);
> > | ^
> > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/tools/include/bpf/bpf_core_read.h:520:35: note: expanded from macro 'BPF_CORE_READ'
> > 520 | ___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) __r; \
> > | ^
> >
> > Fix this by declaring __r to be an array of __u8 of a proper size.
> >
> > Fixes: 792001f4f7aa ("libbpf: Add user-space variants of BPF_CORE_READ() family of macros")
> > Fixes: a4b09a9ef945 ("libbpf: Add non-CO-RE variants of BPF_CORE_READ() macro family")
> > Signed-off-by: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
> > ---
> > tools/lib/bpf/bpf_core_read.h | 16 ++++++++--------
> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_core_read.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_core_read.h
> > index c0e13cdf9660..b7395b75658c 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_core_read.h
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_core_read.h
> > @@ -517,9 +517,9 @@ extern void *bpf_rdonly_cast(const void *obj, __u32 btf_id) __ksym __weak;
> > * than enough for any practical purpose.
> > */
> > #define BPF_CORE_READ(src, a, ...) ({ \
> > - ___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) __r; \
> > + __u8 __r[sizeof(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__))]; \
> > BPF_CORE_READ_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > - __r; \
> > + *(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) *)__r; \
> > })
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -533,16 +533,16 @@ extern void *bpf_rdonly_cast(const void *obj, __u32 btf_id) __ksym __weak;
> > * input argument.
> > */
> > #define BPF_CORE_READ_USER(src, a, ...) ({ \
> > - ___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) __r; \
> > + __u8 __r[sizeof(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__))]; \
> > BPF_CORE_READ_USER_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > - __r; \
> > + *(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) *)__r; \
> > })
> >
> > /* Non-CO-RE variant of BPF_CORE_READ() */
> > #define BPF_PROBE_READ(src, a, ...) ({ \
> > - ___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) __r; \
> > + __u8 __r[sizeof(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__))]; \
> > BPF_PROBE_READ_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > - __r; \
> > + *(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) *)__r; \
> > })
> >
> > /*
> > @@ -552,9 +552,9 @@ extern void *bpf_rdonly_cast(const void *obj, __u32 btf_id) __ksym __weak;
> > * not restricted to kernel types only.
> > */
> > #define BPF_PROBE_READ_USER(src, a, ...) ({ \
> > - ___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) __r; \
> > + __u8 __r[sizeof(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__))]; \
> > BPF_PROBE_READ_USER_INTO(&__r, (src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__); \
> > - __r; \
> > + *(___type((src), a, ##__VA_ARGS__) *)__r; \
> > })
> >
> > #endif
> > --
> > 2.34.1
> >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-30 16:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-29 14:22 [PATCH v2 bpf-next] bpf: fix uninitialized values in BPF_{CORE,PROBE}_READ Anton Protopopov
2025-04-30 16:00 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-04-30 16:33 ` Anton Protopopov [this message]
2025-04-30 16:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-04-30 17:24 ` Anton Protopopov
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=aBJQ6lsZfg8xlM5e@mail.gmail.com \
--to=a.s.protopopov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
/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