netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: Make dst_port field in struct bpf_sock 16-bit wide
Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2022 12:55:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220130115518.213259-2-jakub@cloudflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220130115518.213259-1-jakub@cloudflare.com>

Menglong Dong reports that the documentation for the dst_port field in
struct bpf_sock is inaccurate and confusing. From the BPF program PoV, the
field is a zero-padded 16-bit integer in network byte order. The value
appears to the BPF user as if laid out in memory as so:

  offsetof(struct bpf_sock, dst_port) + 0  <port MSB>
                                      + 8  <port LSB>
                                      +16  0x00
                                      +24  0x00

32-, 16-, and 8-bit wide loads from the field are all allowed, but only if
the offset into the field is 0.

32-bit wide loads from dst_port are especially confusing. The loaded value,
after converting to host byte order with bpf_ntohl(dst_port), contains the
port number in the upper 16-bits.

Remove the confusion by splitting the field into two 16-bit fields. For
backward compatibility, allow 32-bit wide loads from offsetof(struct
bpf_sock, dst_port).

While at it, allow loads 8-bit loads at offset [0] and [1] from dst_port.

Reported-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@tencent.com>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
---
 include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |  3 ++-
 net/core/filter.c        | 10 +++++++++-
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index 4a2f7041ebae..a7f0ddedac1f 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -5574,7 +5574,8 @@ struct bpf_sock {
 	__u32 src_ip4;
 	__u32 src_ip6[4];
 	__u32 src_port;		/* host byte order */
-	__u32 dst_port;		/* network byte order */
+	__be16 dst_port;	/* network byte order */
+	__u16 :16;		/* zero padding */
 	__u32 dst_ip4;
 	__u32 dst_ip6[4];
 	__u32 state;
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index a06931c27eeb..99a05199a806 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -8265,6 +8265,7 @@ bool bpf_sock_is_valid_access(int off, int size, enum bpf_access_type type,
 			      struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
 {
 	const int size_default = sizeof(__u32);
+	int field_size;
 
 	if (off < 0 || off >= sizeof(struct bpf_sock))
 		return false;
@@ -8276,7 +8277,6 @@ bool bpf_sock_is_valid_access(int off, int size, enum bpf_access_type type,
 	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, family):
 	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, type):
 	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, protocol):
-	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, dst_port):
 	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, src_port):
 	case offsetof(struct bpf_sock, rx_queue_mapping):
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sock, src_ip4):
@@ -8285,6 +8285,14 @@ bool bpf_sock_is_valid_access(int off, int size, enum bpf_access_type type,
 	case bpf_ctx_range_till(struct bpf_sock, dst_ip6[0], dst_ip6[3]):
 		bpf_ctx_record_field_size(info, size_default);
 		return bpf_ctx_narrow_access_ok(off, size, size_default);
+	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sock, dst_port):
+		field_size = size == size_default ?
+			size_default : sizeof_field(struct bpf_sock, dst_port);
+		bpf_ctx_record_field_size(info, field_size);
+		return bpf_ctx_narrow_access_ok(off, size, field_size);
+	case offsetofend(struct bpf_sock, dst_port) ...
+	     offsetof(struct bpf_sock, dst_ip4) - 1:
+		return false;
 	}
 
 	return size == size_default;
-- 
2.31.1


  reply	other threads:[~2022-01-30 11:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-01-30 11:55 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] Split bpf_sock dst_port field Jakub Sitnicki
2022-01-30 11:55 ` Jakub Sitnicki [this message]
2022-01-30 11:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Extend verifier and bpf_sock tests for dst_port loads Jakub Sitnicki
2022-01-31 20:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] Split bpf_sock dst_port field Martin KaFai Lau
2022-01-31 20:53 ` 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=20220130115518.213259-2-jakub@cloudflare.com \
    --to=jakub@cloudflare.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=imagedong@tencent.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).