public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	"Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 02/12] bpf: no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 22:34:10 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <b660e0becf9b629a4d236ec5c03b8cc0dcdc2502.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQJ7MAtt-EZLorjuyhoOFijyff7tNDy4-up0L6pjnrZHvg@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, 2024-07-15 at 18:51 -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 4:02 PM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 
> > @@ -21771,6 +22058,12 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr, bpfptr_t uattr, __u3
> >         if (ret == 0)
> >                 ret = check_max_stack_depth(env);
> > 
> > +       /* might decrease stack depth, keep it before passes that
> > +        * allocate additional slots.
> > +        */
> > +       if (ret == 0)
> > +               ret = remove_nocsr_spills_fills(env);
> 
> Probably should be before check_max_stack_depth() above :)

I thought about it, unfortunately, that would be a half-measure.
There are two places where verifier reports stack depth errors:
- check_stack_access_within_bounds() checks for access outside
  [-MAX_BPF_STACK..0) region within one subprogram;
- check_max_stack_depth() checks accumulated stack depth across
  subprogram calls.

It is possible to move remove_nocsr_spills_fills() before
check_max_stack_depth(), but check_stack_access_within_bounds() would
still report errors for nocsr stack slots, because
check_nocsr_stack_contract() and check_stack_access_within_bounds()
are both invoked during main verification pass and contract validation
is not yet finished.

  reply	other threads:[~2024-07-16  5:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-15 23:01 [bpf-next v3 00/12] no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 01/12] bpf: add a get_helper_proto() utility function Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 02/12] bpf: no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-16  1:51   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-16  5:34     ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-07-20  2:00       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-22 18:42         ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 03/12] bpf, x86, riscv, arm: no_caller_saved_registers for bpf_get_smp_processor_id() Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 04/12] selftests/bpf: extract utility function for BPF disassembly Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 05/12] selftests/bpf: print correct offset for pseudo calls in disasm_insn() Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 06/12] selftests/bpf: no need to track next_match_pos in struct test_loader Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 07/12] selftests/bpf: extract test_loader->expect_msgs as a data structure Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 08/12] selftests/bpf: allow checking xlated programs in verifier_* tests Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 09/12] selftests/bpf: __arch_* macro to limit test cases to specific archs Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:01 ` [bpf-next v3 10/12] selftests/bpf: test no_caller_saved_registers spill/fill removal Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:02 ` [bpf-next v3 11/12] bpf: do check_nocsr_stack_contract() for ARG_ANYTHING helper params Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-16  2:00   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-16 10:03     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-16 18:15       ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-20  1:54         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-20  1:58           ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-15 23:02 ` [bpf-next v3 12/12] selftests/bpf: check nocsr contract for bpf_probe_read_kernel() Eduard Zingerman

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=b660e0becf9b629a4d236ec5c03b8cc0dcdc2502.camel@gmail.com \
    --to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=jose.marchesi@oracle.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --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