From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Cc: 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>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Handle MEM_RCU type properly
Date: Wed, 30 Nov 2022 23:05:53 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d46efd51-e6f5-dbb5-ab38-238b6d2ea314@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221129023713.2216451-1-yhs@fb.com>
On 11/28/22 6:37 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
> index c05aa6e1f6f5..6f192dd9025e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
> @@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ static inline bool bpf_prog_check_recur(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
> }
> }
>
> -#define BPF_REG_TRUSTED_MODIFIERS (MEM_ALLOC | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED)
> +#define BPF_REG_TRUSTED_MODIFIERS (MEM_ALLOC | PTR_TRUSTED)
[ ... ]
> +static bool is_rcu_reg(const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
> +{
> + return reg->type & MEM_RCU;
> +}
> +
> static int check_pkt_ptr_alignment(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
> int off, int size, bool strict)
> @@ -4775,12 +4780,10 @@ static int check_ptr_to_btf_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> /* Mark value register as MEM_RCU only if it is protected by
> * bpf_rcu_read_lock() and the ptr reg is trusted. MEM_RCU
> * itself can already indicate trustedness inside the rcu
> - * read lock region. Also mark it as PTR_TRUSTED.
> + * read lock region.
> */
> if (!env->cur_state->active_rcu_lock || !is_trusted_reg(reg))
> flag &= ~MEM_RCU;
How about dereferencing a PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU, like:
/* parent: PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU */
parent = current->real_parent;
/* gparent: PTR_TO_BTF_ID */
gparent = parent->real_parent;
Should "gparent" have MEM_RCU also?
Also, should PTR_MAYBE_NULL be added to "parent"?
> - else
> - flag |= PTR_TRUSTED;
> } else if (reg->type & MEM_RCU) {
> /* ptr (reg) is marked as MEM_RCU, but the struct field is not tagged
> * with __rcu. Mark the flag as PTR_UNTRUSTED conservatively.
> @@ -5945,7 +5948,7 @@ static const struct bpf_reg_types btf_ptr_types = {
> .types = {
> PTR_TO_BTF_ID,
> PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_TRUSTED,
> - PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED,
> + PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU,
> },
> };
> static const struct bpf_reg_types percpu_btf_ptr_types = {
> @@ -6124,7 +6127,7 @@ int check_func_arg_reg_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> case PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
> case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC:
> case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_TRUSTED:
> - case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED:
> + case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU:
> case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | PTR_TRUSTED:
> /* When referenced PTR_TO_BTF_ID is passed to release function,
> * it's fixed offset must be 0. In the other cases, fixed offset
> @@ -8022,6 +8025,11 @@ static bool is_kfunc_destructive(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
> return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_DESTRUCTIVE;
> }
>
> +static bool is_kfunc_rcu(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
> +{
> + return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_RCU;
> +}
> +
> static bool is_kfunc_arg_kptr_get(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta, int arg)
> {
> return arg == 0 && (meta->kfunc_flags & KF_KPTR_GET);
> @@ -8706,13 +8714,19 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
> switch (kf_arg_type) {
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_ALLOC_BTF_ID:
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
> - if (!is_kfunc_trusted_args(meta))
> + if (!is_kfunc_trusted_args(meta) && !is_kfunc_rcu(meta))
> break;
>
> - if (!is_trusted_reg(reg)) {
> - verbose(env, "R%d must be referenced or trusted\n", regno);
> + if (!is_trusted_reg(reg) && !is_rcu_reg(reg)) {
> + verbose(env, "R%d must be referenced, trusted or rcu\n", regno);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> +
> + if (is_kfunc_rcu(meta) != is_rcu_reg(reg)) {
I think is_trusted_reg(reg) should also be acceptable to bpf_task_acquire_rcu().
nit. bpf_task_acquire_not_zero() may be a better kfunc name.
> + verbose(env, "R%d does not match kf arg rcu tagging\n", regno);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> fallthrough;
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_CTX:
> /* Trusted arguments have the same offset checks as release arguments */
> @@ -8823,7 +8837,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
> case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
> /* Only base_type is checked, further checks are done here */
> if ((base_type(reg->type) != PTR_TO_BTF_ID ||
> - bpf_type_has_unsafe_modifiers(reg->type)) &&
> + (bpf_type_has_unsafe_modifiers(reg->type) && !is_rcu_reg(reg))) &&
> !reg2btf_ids[base_type(reg->type)]) {
> verbose(env, "arg#%d is %s ", i, reg_type_str(env, reg->type));
> verbose(env, "expected %s or socket\n",
> @@ -8938,7 +8952,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
> } else if (rcu_unlock) {
> bpf_for_each_reg_in_vstate(env->cur_state, state, reg, ({
> if (reg->type & MEM_RCU) {
> - reg->type &= ~(MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED);
> + reg->type &= ~MEM_RCU;
> reg->type |= PTR_UNTRUSTED;
> }
> }));
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
> index 973f0c5af965..5fbd9edd2c4c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
> @@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static struct {
> const char *prog_name;
> const char *expected_err_msg;
> } failure_tests[] = {
> - {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
> + {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
> {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_fp", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT cgroup must point"},
> {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_unsafe_kretprobe", "reg type unsupported for arg#0 function"},
> - {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
> + {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
> {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_null", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT cgroup must point"},
> {"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_unreleased", "Unreleased reference"},
> {"cgrp_kfunc_get_non_kptr_param", "arg#0 expected pointer to map value"},
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
> index ffd8ef4303c8..80708c073de6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
> @@ -87,10 +87,10 @@ static struct {
> const char *prog_name;
> const char *expected_err_msg;
> } failure_tests[] = {
> - {"task_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
> + {"task_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
> {"task_kfunc_acquire_fp", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT task_struct must point"},
> {"task_kfunc_acquire_unsafe_kretprobe", "reg type unsupported for arg#0 function"},
> - {"task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
> + {"task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
hmm... why this description is changed here? The bpf_task_acquire kfunc-flags
has not changed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-01 7:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-29 2:37 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Handle MEM_RCU type properly Yonghong Song
2022-11-30 0:11 ` Yonghong Song
2022-12-01 7:05 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2022-12-01 17:47 ` Yonghong Song
2022-12-01 22:05 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-12-02 0:08 ` 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=d46efd51-e6f5-dbb5-ab38-238b6d2ea314@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@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=yhs@fb.com \
/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