Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/3] bpf, arm64: use bpf_jit_binary_pack_alloc

Puranjay Mohan
2023-06-21T20:57:58Z

Hi Mark,

On Wed, Jun 21, 2023 at 5:31 PM Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jun 19, 2023 at 10:01:21AM +0000, Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> > Use bpf_jit_binary_pack_alloc for memory management of JIT binaries in
> > ARM64 BPF JIT. The bpf_jit_binary_pack_alloc creates a pair of RW and RX
> > buffers. The JIT writes the program into the RW buffer. When the JIT is
> > done, the program is copied to the final RX buffer
> > with bpf_jit_binary_pack_finalize.
> >
> > Implement bpf_arch_text_copy() and bpf_arch_text_invalidate() for ARM64
> > JIT as these functions are required by bpf_jit_binary_pack allocator.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
>
> From a quick look, I don't beleive the I-cache maintenance is quite right --
> explanation below.
>
> > @@ -1562,34 +1610,39 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >
> > /* 3. Extra pass to validate JITed code. */
> > if (validate_ctx(&ctx)) {
> > - bpf_jit_binary_free(header);
> > prog = orig_prog;
> > - goto out_off;
> > + goto out_free_hdr;
> > }
> >
> > /* And we're done. */
> > if (bpf_jit_enable > 1)
> > bpf_jit_dump(prog->len, prog_size, 2, ctx.image);
> >
> > - bpf_flush_icache(header, ctx.image + ctx.idx);
> > + bpf_flush_icache(ro_header, ctx.ro_image + ctx.idx);
>
> I think this is too early; we haven't copied the instructions into the
> ro_header yet, so that still contains stale instructions.
>
> IIUC at the whole point of this is to pack multiple programs into shared ROX
> pages, and so there can be an executable mapping of the RO page at this point,
> and the CPU can fetch stale instructions throught that.
>
> Note that *regardless* of whether there is an executeable mapping at this point
> (and even if no executable mapping exists until after the copy), we at least
> need a data cache clean to the PoU *after* the copy (so fetches don't get a
> stale value from the PoU), and the I-cache maintenance has to happeon the VA
> the instrutions will be executed from (or VIPT I-caches can still contain stale
> instructions).

Thanks for catching this, It is a big miss from my side.

I was able to reproduce the boot issue in the other thread on my
raspberry pi. I think it is connected to the
wrong I-cache handling done by me.

As you rightly pointed out: We need to do bpf_flush_icache() after
copying the instructions to the ro_header or the CPU can run
incorrect instructions.

When I move the call to bpf_flush_icache() after
bpf_jit_binary_pack_finalize() (this does the copy to ro_header), the
boot issue
is fixed. Would this change be enough to make this work or I would
need to do more with the data cache as well to catch other
edge cases?

Thanks,
Puranjay

>
> Thanks,
> Mark.
>
> >
> > if (!prog->is_func || extra_pass) {
> > if (extra_pass && ctx.idx != jit_data->ctx.idx) {
> > pr_err_once("multi-func JIT bug %d != %d\n",
> > ctx.idx, jit_data->ctx.idx);
> > - bpf_jit_binary_free(header);
> > prog->bpf_func = NULL;
> > prog->jited = 0;
> > prog->jited_len = 0;
> > + goto out_free_hdr;
> > + }
> > + if (WARN_ON(bpf_jit_binary_pack_finalize(prog, ro_header,
> > + header))) {
> > + /* ro_header has been freed */
> > + ro_header = NULL;
> > + prog = orig_prog;
> > goto out_off;
> > }
> > - bpf_jit_binary_lock_ro(header);
> > } else {
> > jit_data->ctx = ctx;
> > - jit_data->image = image_ptr;
> > + jit_data->ro_image = ro_image_ptr;
> > jit_data->header = header;
> > + jit_data->ro_header = ro_header;
> > }
> > - prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.image;
> > + prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.ro_image;
> > prog->jited = 1;
> > prog->jited_len = prog_size;
> >
> > @@ -1610,6 +1663,14 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
> > bpf_jit_prog_release_other(prog, prog == orig_prog ?
> > tmp : orig_prog);
> > return prog;
> > +
> > +out_free_hdr:
> > + if (header) {
> > + bpf_arch_text_copy(&ro_header->size, &header->size,
> > + sizeof(header->size));
> > + bpf_jit_binary_pack_free(ro_header, header);
> > + }
> > + goto out_off;
> > }
> >
> > bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
> > @@ -1617,6 +1678,13 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
> > return true;
> > }
> >
> > +void *bpf_arch_text_copy(void *dst, void *src, size_t len)
> > +{
> > + if (!aarch64_insn_copy(dst, src, len))
> > + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
> > + return dst;
> > +}
> > +
> > u64 bpf_jit_alloc_exec_limit(void)
> > {
> > return VMALLOC_END - VMALLOC_START;
> > @@ -2221,3 +2289,27 @@ int bpf_arch_text_poke(void *ip, enum bpf_text_poke_type poke_type,
> >
> > return ret;
> > }
> > +
> > +void bpf_jit_free(struct bpf_prog *prog)
> > +{
> > + if (prog->jited) {
> > + struct arm64_jit_data *jit_data = prog->aux->jit_data;
> > + struct bpf_binary_header *hdr;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * If we fail the final pass of JIT (from jit_subprogs),
> > + * the program may not be finalized yet. Call finalize here
> > + * before freeing it.
> > + */
> > + if (jit_data) {
> > + bpf_jit_binary_pack_finalize(prog, jit_data->ro_header,
> > + jit_data->header);
> > + kfree(jit_data);
> > + }
> > + hdr = bpf_jit_binary_pack_hdr(prog);
> > + bpf_jit_binary_pack_free(hdr, NULL);
> > + WARN_ON_ONCE(!bpf_prog_kallsyms_verify_off(prog));
> > + }
> > +
> > + bpf_prog_unlock_free(prog);
> > +}
> > --
> > 2.40.1
> >