linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
Cc: Tony Ambardar <tony.ambardar@gmail.com>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org,  Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	 Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	 Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	 Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	 KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
	 Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
	kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org,  Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 13:40:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAMuHMdUaYP3-2JHk-OE9B-AWNU3ikhBdLyWDm0R8DwQpUS9eCw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZnvkxLQBideJH4MB@krava>

Hi Jiri,

On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 11:52 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 25, 2024 at 12:46:48PM +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024, Tony Ambardar wrote:
> > > BPF kfuncs are often not directly referenced and may be inadvertently
> > > removed by optimization steps during kernel builds, thus the __bpf_kfunc
> > > tag mitigates against this removal by including the __used macro. However,
> > > this macro alone does not prevent removal during linking, and may still
> > > yield build warnings (e.g. on mips64el):
> > >
> > >    LD      vmlinux
> > >    BTFIDS  vmlinux
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lookup_user_key
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lookup_system_key
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_key_put
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_iter_task_next
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_iter_css_task_new
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_get_file_xattr
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_ct_insert_entry
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_release
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_from_id
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_acquire
> > >  WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_arena_free_pages
> > >    NM      System.map
> > >    SORTTAB vmlinux
> > >    OBJCOPY vmlinux.32
> > >
> > > Update the __bpf_kfunc tag to better guard against linker optimization by
> > > including the new __retain compiler macro, which fixes the warnings above.
> > >
> > > Verify the __retain macro with readelf by checking object flags for 'R':
> > >
> > >  $ readelf -Wa kernel/trace/bpf_trace.o
> > >  Section Headers:
> > >    [Nr]  Name              Type     Address  Off  Size ES Flg Lk Inf Al
> > >  ...
> > >    [178] .text.bpf_key_put PROGBITS 00000000 6420 0050 00 AXR  0   0  8
> > >  ...
> > >  Key to Flags:
> > >  ...
> > >    R (retain), D (mbind), p (processor specific)
> > >
> > > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZlmGoT9KiYLZd91S@krava/T/
> > > Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> > > Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202401211357.OCX9yllM-lkp@intel.com/
> > > Fixes: 57e7c169cd6a ("bpf: Add __bpf_kfunc tag for marking kernel functions as kfuncs")
> > > Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v6.6+
> > > Signed-off-by: Tony Ambardar <Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
> >
> > Thanks for your patch, which is now commit 7bdcedd5c8fb88e7
> > ("bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal") in
> > v6.10-rc5.
> >
> > This is causing build failures on ARM with
> > CONFIG_LD_DEAD_CODE_DATA_ELIMINATION=y:
> >
> >     net/core/filter.c:11859:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >     11859 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/filter.c:11872:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >     11872 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/filter.c:11885:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >     11885 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/filter.c:11906:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >     11906 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/filter.c:12092:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >     12092 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/xdp.c:713:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >       713 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/xdp.c:736:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >       736 | {
> >           | ^
> >     net/core/xdp.c:769:1: error: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Werror=attributes]
> >       769 | {
> >           | ^
> >     [...]
> >
> > My compiler is arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc version 11.4.0 (Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04).
>
> hum, so it'd mean __has_attribute(__retain__) returns true while gcc still
> ignores the retain attribute.. like in this bug which seems similar:
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=99587
> but not sure how it got fixed.. any chance you can upgrade gcc and retest?

Indeed, __has_attribute(__retain__) returns true, while the attribute
is not supported.

My test program:

cat > /tmp/a.c <<EOF
#if __has_attribute(__retain__)
#warning __retain__ OK
#else
#warning No __retain__
#endif

int x __attribute__((__retain__));
EOF

$ arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-11 -c /tmp/a.c # gcc version 11.4.0 (Ubuntu
11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04))

/tmp/a.c:2:2: warning: #warning __retain__ OK [-Wcpp]
    2 | #warning __retain__ OK
      |  ^~~~~~~
/tmp/a.c:7:1: warning: ‘retain’ attribute ignored [-Wattributes]
    7 | int x __attribute__((__retain__));
      | ^~~

Oops

$ arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-12 -c /tmp/a.c # gcc version 12.3.0 (Ubuntu
12.3.0-1ubuntu1~22.04)
/tmp/a.c:2:2: warning: #warning __retain__ OK [-Wcpp]
    2 | #warning __retain__ OK
      |  ^~~~~~~

Fixed

It works fine with the native gcc-11:

$ gcc-11 -c /tmp/a.c # gcc version 11.4.0 (Ubuntu 11.4.0-1ubuntu1~22.04)
/tmp/a.c:2:2: warning: #warning __retain__ OK [-Wcpp]
    2 | #warning __retain__ OK
      |  ^~~~~~~

I gave it a try on all installed gcc-11 compilers.

/usr/bin/aarch64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/alpha-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc-11
/usr/bin/arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-11
/usr/bin/hppa64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/hppa-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/m68k-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/powerpc64le-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/powerpc64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/powerpc-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/riscv64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/s390x-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/sh4-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/sparc64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-11
/usr/bin/x86_64-linux-gnux32-gcc-11

All of them failed (incl. x32), except for the native x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-11.

It works fine with all installed gcc-12 compilers
(arm-linux-gnueabihf-gcc-12, m68k-linux-gnu-gcc-12, x86_64-linux-gnu-gcc-12).

With gcc-9, the absence of __retain__ is detected correctly.

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

                        Geert

-- 
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@linux-m68k.org

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
                                -- Linus Torvalds

      reply	other threads:[~2024-06-26 11:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <cover.1717413886.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
     [not found] ` <cover.1717477560.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
     [not found]   ` <e9c64e9b5c073dabd457ff45128aabcab7630098.1717477560.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
2024-06-25 10:46     ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal Geert Uytterhoeven
2024-06-26  9:52       ` Jiri Olsa
2024-06-26 11:40         ` Geert Uytterhoeven [this message]

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=CAMuHMdUaYP3-2JHk-OE9B-AWNU3ikhBdLyWDm0R8DwQpUS9eCw@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=geert@linux-m68k.org \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=arnd@arndb.de \
    --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=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=lkp@intel.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
    --cc=olsajiri@gmail.com \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tony.ambardar@gmail.com \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).