Linux Kernel Selftest development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@huawei.com>
To: "Russell King (Oracle)" <linux@armlinux.org.uk>
Cc: <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <andrii@kernel.org>,
	<martin.lau@linux.dev>, <song@kernel.org>, <yhs@fb.com>,
	<john.fastabend@gmail.com>, <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	<sdf@google.com>, <haoluo@google.com>, <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	<illusionist.neo@gmail.com>, <davem@davemloft.net>,
	<edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>, <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	<mykolal@fb.com>, <shuah@kernel.org>,
	<benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>, <memxor@gmail.com>,
	<delyank@fb.com>, <asavkov@redhat.com>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf RESEND 2/4] bpf: Remove size check for sk in bpf_skb_is_valid_access for 32-bit architecture
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2022 17:12:10 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <342e1213-7ca8-5e6b-1c6c-a3e7dfbfeed6@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y2OknBtLgqTHSrvy@shell.armlinux.org.uk>

Hello,

On 2022/11/3 19:23, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2022 at 05:21:16PM +0800, Yang Jihong wrote:
>> The error code -EACCES is returned when bpf prog is tested in 32-bit environment,
>> This is because bpf_object__relocate modifies the instruction to change memory
>> size to 4 bytes, as shown in the following messages:
>>
>> libbpf: prog 'kfunc_call_test1': relo #2: matching candidate #0 <byte_off> [18342] struct __sk_buff.sk (0:30:0 @ offset 168)
>> libbpf: prog 'kfunc_call_test1': relo #2: patched insn #1 (LDX/ST/STX) off 168 -> 168
>> libbpf: prog 'kfunc_call_test1': relo #2: patched insn #1 (LDX/ST/STX) mem_sz 8 -> 4
>>
>> As a result, the bpf_skb_is_valid_access check fails. For 32-bit architecture,
>> unnecessary checks need to be deleted.
> 
> Isn't the purpose of this check to ensure that the entire pointer is
> written, and BPF can't write half of it?
> 
> 
>>   	case offsetof(struct __sk_buff, sk):
>> -		if (type == BPF_WRITE || size != sizeof(__u64))
>> -			return false;
> 
> Wouldn't "(size != sizeof(struct bpf_sock *) && size != sizeof(__u64))"
> be more appropriate here, so 32-bit can only write the 32-bit pointer
> or the full 64-bit value, and 64-bit can only write the 64-bit pointer?
> Or is there a reason not to? bpf folk?
> 
Thanks for the detailed proposals, will fix it in next version.

Thanks,
Yang

  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-07  9:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-03  9:21 [PATCH bpf RESEND 0/4] bpf: Support kernel function call in 32-bit ARM Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  9:21 ` [PATCH bpf RESEND 1/4] bpf: Adapt 32-bit return value kfunc for 32-bit ARM when zext extension Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  9:21 ` [PATCH bpf RESEND 2/4] bpf: Remove size check for sk in bpf_skb_is_valid_access for 32-bit architecture Yang Jihong
2022-11-03 11:23   ` Russell King (Oracle)
2022-11-03 18:15     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-11-04 22:43       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-11-04 23:37         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-11-07  9:22           ` Yang Jihong
2022-11-07  9:12     ` Yang Jihong [this message]
2022-11-03  9:21 ` [PATCH bpf RESEND 3/4] bpf: Add kernel function call support in 32-bit ARM Yang Jihong
2022-11-03 11:35   ` Russell King (Oracle)
2022-11-07  9:10     ` Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  9:21 ` [PATCH bpf RESEND 4/4] bpf:selftests: Add kfunc_call test for mixing 32-bit and 64-bit parameters Yang Jihong

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=342e1213-7ca8-5e6b-1c6c-a3e7dfbfeed6@huawei.com \
    --to=yangjihong1@huawei.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=asavkov@redhat.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=delyank@fb.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=illusionist.neo@gmail.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=mykolal@fb.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@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