public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
	yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
	kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
	jolsa@kernel.org, memxor@gmail.com, ameryhung@gmail.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-patches-bot@fb.com,
	Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
Date: Wed,  5 Nov 2025 23:14:05 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251105151407.12723-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev> (raw)

In the discussion thread
"[PATCH bpf-next v9 0/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags for percpu maps"[1],
it was pointed out that missing calls to bpf_obj_free_fields() could
lead to memory leaks.

A selftest was added to confirm that this is indeed a real issue - the
refcount of BPF_KPTR_REF field is not decremented when
bpf_obj_free_fields() is missing after copy_map_value[,_long]().

Further inspection of copy_map_value[,_long]() call sites revealed two
locations affected by this issue:

1. pcpu_copy_value()
2. htab_map_update_elem() when used with BPF_F_LOCK

Similar case happens when update local storage maps with BPF_F_LOCK.

This series fixes the cases where BPF_F_LOCK is not involved by
properly calling bpf_obj_free_fields() after copy_map_value[,_long](),
and adds a selftest to verify the fix.

The remaining cases involving BPF_F_LOCK will be addressed in a
separate patch set after the series
"bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags for percpu maps"
is applied.

Changes:
v5 -> v6:
* Update the test name to include "refcounted_kptr".
* Update some local variables' name in the test (per Alexei).
* v5: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251104142714.99878-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/

v4 -> v5:
* Use a local variable to store the this_cpu_ptr()/per_cpu_ptr() result,
  and reuse it between copy_map_value[,_long]() and
  bpf_obj_free_fields() in patch #1 (per Andrii).
* Drop patch #2 and #3, because the combination of BPF_F_LOCK with other
  special fields (except for BPF_SPIN_LOCK) will be disallowed on the
  UAPI side in the future (per Alexei).
* v4: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251030152451.62778-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/

v3 -> v4:
* Target bpf-next tree.
* Address comments from Amery:
  * Drop 'bpf_obj_free_fields()' in the path of updating local storage
    maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
  * Drop the corresponding self test.
  * Respin the other test of local storage maps using syscall BPF
    programs.
* v3: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251026154000.34151-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/

v2 -> v3:
* Free special fields when update local storage maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
* Add test to verify decrementing refcount when update cgroup local
  storage maps without BPF_F_LOCK.
* Address review from AI bot:
  * Slow path with BPF_F_LOCK (around line 642-646) in
    'bpf_local_storage.c'.
* v2: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251020164608.20536-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/

v1 -> v2:
* Add test to verify decrementing refcount when update cgroup local
  storage maps with BPF_F_LOCK.
* Address review from AI bot:
  * Fast path without bucket lock (around line 610) in
    'bpf_local_storage.c'.
* v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20251016145801.47552-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev/

Leon Hwang (2):
  bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps
  selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the special fields when
    update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps

 kernel/bpf/hashtab.c                          | 10 +++-
 .../bpf/prog_tests/refcounted_kptr.c          | 57 ++++++++++++++++++
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/refcounted_kptr.c     | 60 +++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

--
2.51.2


             reply	other threads:[~2025-11-05 15:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-05 15:14 Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] bpf: Free special fields when update [lru_,]percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
2025-11-07  1:56   ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-05 15:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add test to verify freeing the " Leon Hwang
2025-11-07  2:00   ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-11 13:38     ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 13:52       ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-11 21:58         ` Yonghong Song
2025-11-13 13:16           ` Leon Hwang
2025-11-13 17:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/2] bpf: Free " 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=20251105151407.12723-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
    --cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --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