public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/7] bpf: Ensure kptr_struct_meta is non-NULL for collection insert and refcount_acquire
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 18:52:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c01a78b3-cd40-bcc6-ae61-7bafb311d176@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230821193311.3290257-2-davemarchevsky@fb.com>



On 8/21/23 12:33 PM, Dave Marchevsky wrote:
> It's straightforward to prove that kptr_struct_meta must be non-NULL for
> any valid call to these kfuncs:
> 
>    * btf_parse_struct_metas in btf.c creates a btf_struct_meta for any
>      struct in user BTF with a special field (e.g. bpf_refcount,
>      {rb,list}_node). These are stored in that BTF's struct_meta_tab.
> 
>    * __process_kf_arg_ptr_to_graph_node in verifier.c ensures that nodes
>      have {rb,list}_node field and that it's at the correct offset.
>      Similarly, check_kfunc_args ensures bpf_refcount field existence for
>      node param to bpf_refcount_acquire.
> 
>    * So a btf_struct_meta must have been created for the struct type of
>      node param to these kfuncs
> 
>    * That BTF and its struct_meta_tab are guaranteed to still be around.
>      Any arbitrary {rb,list} node the BPF program interacts with either:
>      came from bpf_obj_new or a collection removal kfunc in the same
>      program, in which case the BTF is associated with the program and
>      still around; or came from bpf_kptr_xchg, in which case the BTF was
>      associated with the map and is still around
> 
> Instead of silently continuing with NULL struct_meta, which caused
> confusing bugs such as those addressed by commit 2140a6e3422d ("bpf: Set
> kptr_struct_meta for node param to list and rbtree insert funcs"), let's
> error out. Then, at runtime, we can confidently say that the
> implementations of these kfuncs were given a non-NULL kptr_struct_meta,
> meaning that special-field-specific functionality like
> bpf_obj_free_fields and the bpf_obj_drop change introduced later in this
> series are guaranteed to execute.
> 
> This patch doesn't change functionality, just makes it easier to reason
> about existing functionality.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>

  reply	other threads:[~2023-08-22  1:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-08-21 19:33 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/7] BPF Refcount followups 3: bpf_mem_free_rcu refcounted nodes Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/7] bpf: Ensure kptr_struct_meta is non-NULL for collection insert and refcount_acquire Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-22  1:52   ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/7] bpf: Consider non-owning refs trusted Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: Use bpf_mem_free_rcu when bpf_obj_dropping refcounted nodes Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-23  6:26   ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-23 16:20     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-23 20:29       ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-24  1:38         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-24  2:09           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-24  4:01             ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-24  3:52           ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-24 22:03             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-24 22:25               ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: Reenable bpf_refcount_acquire Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 5/7] bpf: Consider non-owning refs to refcounted nodes RCU protected Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-22  2:37   ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-22  3:19     ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-22  5:47     ` David Marchevsky
2023-08-22 16:02       ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-22 23:45       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-23  0:18         ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-23  0:21           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: Allow bpf_spin_{lock,unlock} in sleepable progs Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-22  2:53   ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-22 19:46     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-08-22 19:53       ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-21 19:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: Add tests for rbtree API interaction " Dave Marchevsky
2023-08-22  3:18   ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-22  5:21     ` David Marchevsky
2023-08-22 15:00       ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-25 16:40 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/7] BPF Refcount followups 3: bpf_mem_free_rcu refcounted nodes patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=c01a78b3-cd40-bcc6-ae61-7bafb311d176@linux.dev \
    --to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davemarchevsky@fb.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@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