BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Reduce stack frame size by using env->insn_buf for bpf insns
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2025 10:54:15 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <aGTztxGRXTbD3lp9@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250702053332.1991516-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>

On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 10:33:32PM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
> Arnd Bergmann reported an issue ([1]) where clang compiler (less than
> llvm18) may trigger an error where the stack frame size exceeds the limit.
> I can reproduce the error like below:
>   kernel/bpf/verifier.c:24491:5: error: stack frame size (2552) exceeds limit (1280) in 'bpf_check'
>       [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than]
>   kernel/bpf/verifier.c:19921:12: error: stack frame size (1368) exceeds limit (1280) in 'do_check'
>       [-Werror,-Wframe-larger-than]
> 
> Use env->insn_buf for bpf insns instead of putting these insns on the
> stack. This can resolve the above 'bpf_check' error. The 'do_check' error
> will be resolved in the next patch.
> 
>   [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250620113846.3950478-1-arnd@kernel.org/
> 
> Reported-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>

lgtm

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

jirka


> ---
>  kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 194 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------------
>  1 file changed, 91 insertions(+), 103 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 90e688f81a48..29faef51065d 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -20939,26 +20939,27 @@ static bool insn_is_cond_jump(u8 code)
>  static void opt_hard_wire_dead_code_branches(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  {
>  	struct bpf_insn_aux_data *aux_data = env->insn_aux_data;
> -	struct bpf_insn ja = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0);
> +	struct bpf_insn *ja = env->insn_buf;
>  	struct bpf_insn *insn = env->prog->insnsi;
>  	const int insn_cnt = env->prog->len;
>  	int i;
>  
> +	*ja = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 0);
>  	for (i = 0; i < insn_cnt; i++, insn++) {
>  		if (!insn_is_cond_jump(insn->code))
>  			continue;
>  
>  		if (!aux_data[i + 1].seen)
> -			ja.off = insn->off;
> +			ja->off = insn->off;
>  		else if (!aux_data[i + 1 + insn->off].seen)
> -			ja.off = 0;
> +			ja->off = 0;
>  		else
>  			continue;
>  
>  		if (bpf_prog_is_offloaded(env->prog->aux))
> -			bpf_prog_offload_replace_insn(env, i, &ja);
> +			bpf_prog_offload_replace_insn(env, i, ja);
>  
> -		memcpy(insn, &ja, sizeof(ja));
> +		memcpy(insn, ja, sizeof(*ja));
>  	}
>  }
>  
> @@ -21017,7 +21018,9 @@ static int opt_remove_nops(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  static int opt_subreg_zext_lo32_rnd_hi32(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
>  					 const union bpf_attr *attr)
>  {
> -	struct bpf_insn *patch, zext_patch[2], rnd_hi32_patch[4];
> +	struct bpf_insn *patch;
> +	struct bpf_insn *zext_patch = env->insn_buf;
> +	struct bpf_insn *rnd_hi32_patch = &env->insn_buf[2];
>  	struct bpf_insn_aux_data *aux = env->insn_aux_data;
>  	int i, patch_len, delta = 0, len = env->prog->len;
>  	struct bpf_insn *insns = env->prog->insnsi;
> @@ -21195,13 +21198,12 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  
>  		if (env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].nospec) {
>  			WARN_ON_ONCE(env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].alu_state);
> -			struct bpf_insn patch[] = {
> -				BPF_ST_NOSPEC(),
> -				*insn,
> -			};
> +			struct bpf_insn *patch = &insn_buf[0];
>  
> -			cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(patch);
> -			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patch, cnt);
> +			*patch++ = BPF_ST_NOSPEC();
> +			*patch++ = *insn;
> +			cnt = patch - insn_buf;
> +			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
>  			if (!new_prog)
>  				return -ENOMEM;
>  
> @@ -21269,13 +21271,12 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  			/* nospec_result is only used to mitigate Spectre v4 and
>  			 * to limit verification-time for Spectre v1.
>  			 */
> -			struct bpf_insn patch[] = {
> -				*insn,
> -				BPF_ST_NOSPEC(),
> -			};
> +			struct bpf_insn *patch = &insn_buf[0];
>  
> -			cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(patch);
> -			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patch, cnt);
> +			*patch++ = *insn;
> +			*patch++ = BPF_ST_NOSPEC();
> +			cnt = patch - insn_buf;
> +			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
>  			if (!new_prog)
>  				return -ENOMEM;
>  
> @@ -21945,13 +21946,12 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  	u16 stack_depth_extra = 0;
>  
>  	if (env->seen_exception && !env->exception_callback_subprog) {
> -		struct bpf_insn patch[] = {
> -			env->prog->insnsi[insn_cnt - 1],
> -			BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
> -			BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> -		};
> +		struct bpf_insn *patch = &insn_buf[0];
>  
> -		ret = add_hidden_subprog(env, patch, ARRAY_SIZE(patch));
> +		*patch++ = env->prog->insnsi[insn_cnt - 1];
> +		*patch++ = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1);
> +		*patch++ = BPF_EXIT_INSN();
> +		ret = add_hidden_subprog(env, insn_buf, patch - insn_buf);
>  		if (ret < 0)
>  			return ret;
>  		prog = env->prog;
> @@ -21987,20 +21987,18 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  		    insn->off == 1 && insn->imm == -1) {
>  			bool is64 = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64;
>  			bool isdiv = BPF_OP(insn->code) == BPF_DIV;
> -			struct bpf_insn *patchlet;
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_sdiv[] = {
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> -					     BPF_NEG | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> -					     0, 0, 0),
> -			};
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_smod[] = {
> -				BPF_MOV32_IMM(insn->dst_reg, 0),
> -			};
> +			struct bpf_insn *patch = &insn_buf[0];
> +
> +			if (isdiv)
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> +							BPF_NEG | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> +							0, 0, 0);
> +			else
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV32_IMM(insn->dst_reg, 0);
>  
> -			patchlet = isdiv ? chk_and_sdiv : chk_and_smod;
> -			cnt = isdiv ? ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_sdiv) : ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_smod);
> +			cnt = patch - insn_buf;
>  
> -			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patchlet, cnt);
> +			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
>  			if (!new_prog)
>  				return -ENOMEM;
>  
> @@ -22019,83 +22017,73 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>  			bool isdiv = BPF_OP(insn->code) == BPF_DIV;
>  			bool is_sdiv = isdiv && insn->off == 1;
>  			bool is_smod = !isdiv && insn->off == 1;
> -			struct bpf_insn *patchlet;
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_div[] = {
> -				/* [R,W]x div 0 -> 0 */
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JNE | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
> -					     0, 2, 0),
> -				BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_XOR, insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
> -				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
> -				*insn,
> -			};
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_mod[] = {
> -				/* [R,W]x mod 0 -> [R,W]x */
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
> -					     0, 1 + (is64 ? 0 : 1), 0),
> -				*insn,
> -				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
> -				BPF_MOV32_REG(insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
> -			};
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_sdiv[] = {
> +			struct bpf_insn *patch = &insn_buf[0];
> +
> +			if (is_sdiv) {
>  				/* [R,W]x sdiv 0 -> 0
>  				 * LLONG_MIN sdiv -1 -> LLONG_MIN
>  				 * INT_MIN sdiv -1 -> INT_MIN
>  				 */
> -				BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_AX, insn->src_reg),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> -					     BPF_ADD | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 0, 1),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JGT | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 4, 1),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 1, 0),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> -					     BPF_MOV | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> -					     0, 0, 0),
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_AX, insn->src_reg);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> +							BPF_ADD | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JGT | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 4, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 1, 0);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> +							BPF_MOV | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> +							0, 0, 0);
>  				/* BPF_NEG(LLONG_MIN) == -LLONG_MIN == LLONG_MIN */
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> -					     BPF_NEG | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> -					     0, 0, 0),
> -				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
> -				*insn,
> -			};
> -			struct bpf_insn chk_and_smod[] = {
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> +							BPF_NEG | BPF_K, insn->dst_reg,
> +							0, 0, 0);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = *insn;
> +				cnt = patch - insn_buf;
> +			} else if (is_smod) {
>  				/* [R,W]x mod 0 -> [R,W]x */
>  				/* [R,W]x mod -1 -> 0 */
> -				BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_AX, insn->src_reg),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> -					     BPF_ADD | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 0, 1),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JGT | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 3, 1),
> -				BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> -					     BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> -					     0, 3 + (is64 ? 0 : 1), 1),
> -				BPF_MOV32_IMM(insn->dst_reg, 0),
> -				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
> -				*insn,
> -				BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
> -				BPF_MOV32_REG(insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg),
> -			};
> -
> -			if (is_sdiv) {
> -				patchlet = chk_and_sdiv;
> -				cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_sdiv);
> -			} else if (is_smod) {
> -				patchlet = chk_and_smod;
> -				cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_smod) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_AX, insn->src_reg);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_ALU64 : BPF_ALU) |
> +							BPF_ADD | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JGT | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 3, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, BPF_REG_AX,
> +							0, 3 + (is64 ? 0 : 1), 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV32_IMM(insn->dst_reg, 0);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = *insn;
> +				*patch++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV32_REG(insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg);
> +				cnt = (patch - insn_buf) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
> +			} else if (isdiv) {
> +				/* [R,W]x div 0 -> 0 */
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JNE | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
> +							0, 2, 0);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_XOR, insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = *insn;
> +				cnt = patch - insn_buf;
>  			} else {
> -				patchlet = isdiv ? chk_and_div : chk_and_mod;
> -				cnt = isdiv ? ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_div) :
> -					      ARRAY_SIZE(chk_and_mod) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
> +				/* [R,W]x mod 0 -> [R,W]x */
> +				*patch++ = BPF_RAW_INSN((is64 ? BPF_JMP : BPF_JMP32) |
> +							BPF_JEQ | BPF_K, insn->src_reg,
> +							0, 1 + (is64 ? 0 : 1), 0);
> +				*patch++ = *insn;
> +				*patch++ = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1);
> +				*patch++ = BPF_MOV32_REG(insn->dst_reg, insn->dst_reg);
> +				cnt = (patch - insn_buf) - (is64 ? 2 : 0);
>  			}
>  
> -			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, patchlet, cnt);
> +			new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt);
>  			if (!new_prog)
>  				return -ENOMEM;
>  
> -- 
> 2.47.1
> 
> 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-07-02  8:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-07-02  5:33 [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Reduce stack frame size by using env->insn_buf for bpf insns Yonghong Song
2025-07-02  5:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: Avoid putting struct bpf_scc_callchain variables on the stack Yonghong Song
2025-07-02  8:49   ` Jiri Olsa
2025-07-02  8:54 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2025-07-02  9:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Reduce stack frame size by using env->insn_buf for bpf insns Arnd Bergmann
2025-07-02 15:09 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-07-02 15:29   ` Yonghong Song

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=aGTztxGRXTbD3lp9@krava \
    --to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@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