From: Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Kairui Song <kasong@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] x86/unwind/orc: Fall back to using frame pointers for generated code
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2019 10:56:20 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190614155620.f2kdlh4ttrxyyzuc@treble> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQLp+Eq3fz6u+Q3_2UxDwdn1hKESwS5O856BabJE4wfPJw@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 08:31:53AM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 14, 2019 at 6:34 AM Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2019 at 11:00:09PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > > + if (src_reg == BPF_REG_FP) {
> > > > + /*
> > > > + * If the value was copied from RBP (real frame pointer),
> > > > + * adjust it to the BPF program's frame pointer value.
> > > > + *
> > > > + * add dst, -40
> > > > + */
> > > > + EMIT4(add_1mod(0x48, dst_reg), 0x83, add_1reg(0xC0, dst_reg),
> > > > + 0xD8);
> > > > + }
> > > > +
> > >
> > > That won't work. Any register can point to a stack.
> >
> > Right, but if the stack pointer comes from BPF_REG_FP then won't the
> > above correct it? Then if the pointer gets passed around to other
> > registers it will have the correct value. Or did I miss your point?
>
> At the beginning of the program frame pointer is bpf_reg_fp,
> but later it can be in any register. It can be spilled into stack.
> Some math done on it and that adjusted pointer passed into
> another jited function.
> It's perfectly fine for one bpf program to modify stack of
> another bpf program. The verifier checks the safety bounds, etc.
I still don't get what you're saying. The above patch attempted to
cover all those scenarios by always subtracting an offset from all movs
and stack accesses relating to BPF_REG_FP. It might be missing a case
or two but it seems like it should work. From the program's point of
view, BPF_REG_FP should always show the right value no matter where it
gets moved to.
But anyway, David L's nested frame idea might be a much simpler change.
I'll look at that.
--
Josh
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-06-14 15:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-06-13 13:20 [PATCH 0/9] x86/bpf: unwinder fixes Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:20 ` [PATCH 1/9] perf/x86: Always store regs->ip in perf_callchain_kernel() Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:20 ` [PATCH 2/9] objtool: Fix ORC unwinding in non-JIT BPF generated code Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 20:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:20 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 1:37 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:51 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 7:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 7:35 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 8:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 15:13 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 16:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 3/9] x86/bpf: Move epilogue generation to a dedicated function Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 18:57 ` Song Liu
2019-06-13 19:12 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 4/9] x86/bpf: Simplify prologue generation Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 5/9] x86/bpf: Support SIB byte generation Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 6/9] x86/bpf: Fix JIT frame pointer usage Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 21:58 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:22 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 1:39 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:52 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 10:50 ` David Laight
2019-06-14 13:44 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 13:58 ` David Laight
2019-06-14 17:07 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-17 15:07 ` David Laight
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 7/9] x86/unwind/orc: Fall back to using frame pointers for generated code Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 22:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:30 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 1:42 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 1:58 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 2:28 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 4:50 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 6:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 7:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 13:31 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 15:29 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 13:34 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 15:31 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-06-14 15:56 ` Josh Poimboeuf [this message]
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 8/9] x86/bpf: Convert asm comments to AT&T syntax Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 18:52 ` Song Liu
2019-06-13 19:11 ` Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-14 7:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2019-06-14 15:13 ` Song Liu
2019-06-13 13:21 ` [PATCH 9/9] x86/bpf: Convert MOV function/macro argument ordering " Josh Poimboeuf
2019-06-13 19:00 ` [PATCH 0/9] x86/bpf: unwinder fixes Song Liu
2019-06-13 20:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20190614155620.f2kdlh4ttrxyyzuc@treble \
--to=jpoimboe@redhat.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kasong@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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