From: Mykyta Yatsenko <mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com>
To: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@kernel.org,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 03/11] bpf: Unify dynptr handling in the verifier
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2026 22:22:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87fr66t3a7.fsf@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMB2axOuQGzb0ekbS6-5K_cTcDta+sUk3NjZtzSaYvbXT1EOcw@mail.gmail.com>
Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2026 at 9:03 AM Mykyta Yatsenko
> <mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > Simplify dynptr checking for helper and kfunc by unifying it. Remember
>> > initialized dynptr in process_dynptr_func() so that we can easily
>> > retrieve the information for verification later.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
>> > ---
>> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 179 +++++++++---------------------------------
>> > 1 file changed, 36 insertions(+), 143 deletions(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> > index 0f77c4c5b510..d52780962adb 100644
>> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> > @@ -277,8 +277,15 @@ struct bpf_map_desc {
>> > int uid;
>> > };
>> >
>> > +struct bpf_dynptr_desc {
>> > + enum bpf_dynptr_type type;
>> > + u32 id;
>> > + u32 ref_obj_id;
>> nit: let's add a comment here explaining what this field is for.
>
> We are about to change the meaning of id and ref_obj_id. I can add
> comments explaining id, ref_obj_id and parent_id in the refactor patch
> (#6). That said, the meaning of these fields will apply to all objects
> tracked by the verifier, not just limited to dynptr, and is already
> documented when we define bpf_reg_state in
> include/linux/bpf_verifier.h. Can you share a bit what info you are
> looking for?
>
>
the description from commit message would help:
/* id of the referenced object; objects with same ref_obj_id have the same lifetime */
Oftentimes when I work on verifier, it's difficult to understand what
some data field is for. It's easier now with the AI, but still I see a
lot of value to have that inline. Essentially ref_obj_id does not have
obvious meaning (at least to me).
>> > +};
>> > +
>> > struct bpf_call_arg_meta {
>> > struct bpf_map_desc map;
>> > + struct bpf_dynptr_desc initialized_dynptr;
>> > bool raw_mode;
>> > bool pkt_access;
>> > u8 release_regno;
>> > @@ -287,7 +294,6 @@ struct bpf_call_arg_meta {
>> > int mem_size;
>> > u64 msize_max_value;
>> > int ref_obj_id;
>> > - int dynptr_id;
>> > int func_id;
>> > struct btf *btf;
>> > u32 btf_id;
>> > @@ -346,16 +352,12 @@ struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta {
>> > struct {
>> > struct btf_field *field;
>> > } arg_rbtree_root;
>> > - struct {
>> > - enum bpf_dynptr_type type;
>> > - u32 id;
>> > - u32 ref_obj_id;
>> > - } initialized_dynptr;
>> > struct {
>> > u8 spi;
>> > u8 frameno;
>> > } iter;
>> > struct bpf_map_desc map;
>> > + struct bpf_dynptr_desc initialized_dynptr;
>> > u64 mem_size;
>> > };
>> >
>> > @@ -511,11 +513,6 @@ static bool is_ptr_cast_function(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
>> > func_id == BPF_FUNC_skc_to_tcp_request_sock;
>> > }
>> >
>> > -static bool is_dynptr_ref_function(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
>> > -{
>> > - return func_id == BPF_FUNC_dynptr_data;
>> > -}
>> > -
>> > static bool is_sync_callback_calling_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
>> > static bool is_async_callback_calling_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
>> > static bool is_callback_calling_kfunc(u32 btf_id);
>> > @@ -597,8 +594,6 @@ static bool helper_multiple_ref_obj_use(enum bpf_func_id func_id,
>> > ref_obj_uses++;
>> > if (is_acquire_function(func_id, map))
>> > ref_obj_uses++;
>> > - if (is_dynptr_ref_function(func_id))
>> > - ref_obj_uses++;
>> >
>> > return ref_obj_uses > 1;
>> > }
>> > @@ -8750,7 +8745,8 @@ static int process_kptr_func(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno,
>> > * type, and declare it as 'const struct bpf_dynptr *' in their prototype.
>> > */
>> > static int process_dynptr_func(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno, int insn_idx,
>> > - enum bpf_arg_type arg_type, int clone_ref_obj_id)
>> > + enum bpf_arg_type arg_type, int clone_ref_obj_id,
>> > + struct bpf_dynptr_desc *initialized_dynptr)
>> > {
>> > struct bpf_reg_state *reg = reg_state(env, regno);
>> > int err;
>> > @@ -8825,6 +8821,20 @@ static int process_dynptr_func(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno, int insn
>> > }
>> >
>> > err = mark_dynptr_read(env, reg);
>> > +
>> > + if (initialized_dynptr) {
>> > + struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
>> state is only used if reg->type != CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR, does it make
>> sense to move state = func(env, reg); to the corresponding if block?
>
> I think this is fine. It looks less cluttered this way.
>
>> > + int spi;
>> > +
>> > + if (reg->type != CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR) {
>> > + spi = dynptr_get_spi(env, reg);
>> looking at the deleted dynptr_id() and dynptr_ref_obj_id() spi can be
>> negative, what changed here that we no longer need this check?
>
> is_dynptr_reg_valid_init() above already makes sure reg points to a
> valid dynptr so we don't need to check it again.
>
>> > + reg = &state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > + initialized_dynptr->id = reg->id;
>> > + initialized_dynptr->type = reg->dynptr.type;
>> > + initialized_dynptr->ref_obj_id = reg->ref_obj_id;
>> > + }
>> > }
>> > return err;
>> > }
>> > @@ -9587,72 +9597,6 @@ static int check_func_arg_reg_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > -static struct bpf_reg_state *get_dynptr_arg_reg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
>> > - const struct bpf_func_proto *fn,
>> > - struct bpf_reg_state *regs)
>> > -{
>> > - struct bpf_reg_state *state = NULL;
>> > - int i;
>> > -
>> > - for (i = 0; i < MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS; i++)
>> > - if (arg_type_is_dynptr(fn->arg_type[i])) {
>> > - if (state) {
>> > - verbose(env, "verifier internal error: multiple dynptr args\n");
>> > - return NULL;
>> > - }
>> > - state = ®s[BPF_REG_1 + i];
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > - if (!state)
>> > - verbose(env, "verifier internal error: no dynptr arg found\n");
>> > -
>> > - return state;
>> > -}
>> > -
>> > -static int dynptr_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
>> > -{
>> > - struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
>> > - int spi;
>> > -
>> > - if (reg->type == CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR)
>> > - return reg->id;
>> > - spi = dynptr_get_spi(env, reg);
>> > - if (spi < 0)
>> > - return spi;
>> > - return state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.id;
>> > -}
>> > -
>> > -static int dynptr_ref_obj_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
>> > -{
>> > - struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
>> > - int spi;
>> > -
>> > - if (reg->type == CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR)
>> > - return reg->ref_obj_id;
>> > - spi = dynptr_get_spi(env, reg);
>> > - if (spi < 0)
>> > - return spi;
>> > - return state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.ref_obj_id;
>> > -}
>> > -
>> > -static enum bpf_dynptr_type dynptr_get_type(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
>> > - struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
>> > -{
>> > - struct bpf_func_state *state = func(env, reg);
>> > - int spi;
>> > -
>> > - if (reg->type == CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR)
>> > - return reg->dynptr.type;
>> > -
>> > - spi = __get_spi(reg->var_off.value);
>> > - if (spi < 0) {
>> > - verbose(env, "verifier internal error: invalid spi when querying dynptr type\n");
>> > - return BPF_DYNPTR_TYPE_INVALID;
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > - return state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr.dynptr.type;
>> > -}
>> > -
>> > static int check_reg_const_str(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
>> > struct bpf_reg_state *reg, u32 regno)
>> > {
>> > @@ -10007,7 +9951,8 @@ static int check_func_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 arg,
>> > true, meta);
>> > break;
>> > case ARG_PTR_TO_DYNPTR:
>> > - err = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, insn_idx, arg_type, 0);
>> > + err = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, insn_idx, arg_type, 0,
>> > + &meta->initialized_dynptr);
>> > if (err)
>> > return err;
>> > break;
>> > @@ -10666,7 +10611,7 @@ static int btf_check_func_arg_match(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int subprog,
>> > if (ret)
>> > return ret;
>> >
>> > - ret = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, -1, arg->arg_type, 0);
>> > + ret = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, -1, arg->arg_type, 0, NULL);
>> > if (ret)
>> > return ret;
>> > } else if (base_type(arg->arg_type) == ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID) {
>> > @@ -11771,52 +11716,10 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
>> > }
>> > }
>> > break;
>> > - case BPF_FUNC_dynptr_data:
>> > - {
>> > - struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
>> > - int id, ref_obj_id;
>> > -
>> > - reg = get_dynptr_arg_reg(env, fn, regs);
>> > - if (!reg)
>> > - return -EFAULT;
>> > -
>> > -
>> > - if (meta.dynptr_id) {
>> > - verifier_bug(env, "meta.dynptr_id already set");
>> > - return -EFAULT;
>> > - }
>> > - if (meta.ref_obj_id) {
>> > - verifier_bug(env, "meta.ref_obj_id already set");
>> > - return -EFAULT;
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > - id = dynptr_id(env, reg);
>> > - if (id < 0) {
>> > - verifier_bug(env, "failed to obtain dynptr id");
>> > - return id;
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > - ref_obj_id = dynptr_ref_obj_id(env, reg);
>> > - if (ref_obj_id < 0) {
>> > - verifier_bug(env, "failed to obtain dynptr ref_obj_id");
>> > - return ref_obj_id;
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > - meta.dynptr_id = id;
>> > - meta.ref_obj_id = ref_obj_id;
>> > -
>> > - break;
>> > - }
>> > case BPF_FUNC_dynptr_write:
>> > {
>> > - enum bpf_dynptr_type dynptr_type;
>> > - struct bpf_reg_state *reg;
>> > -
>> > - reg = get_dynptr_arg_reg(env, fn, regs);
>> > - if (!reg)
>> > - return -EFAULT;
>> > + enum bpf_dynptr_type dynptr_type = meta.initialized_dynptr.type;
>> >
>> > - dynptr_type = dynptr_get_type(env, reg);
>> > if (dynptr_type == BPF_DYNPTR_TYPE_INVALID)
>> > return -EFAULT;
>> >
>> > @@ -12007,10 +11910,7 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
>> > return -EFAULT;
>> > }
>> >
>> > - if (is_dynptr_ref_function(func_id))
>> > - regs[BPF_REG_0].dynptr_id = meta.dynptr_id;
>> > -
>> > - if (is_ptr_cast_function(func_id) || is_dynptr_ref_function(func_id)) {
>> > + if (is_ptr_cast_function(func_id)) {
>> > /* For release_reference() */
>> > regs[BPF_REG_0].ref_obj_id = meta.ref_obj_id;
>> > } else if (is_acquire_function(func_id, meta.map.ptr)) {
>> > @@ -12024,6 +11924,11 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
>> > regs[BPF_REG_0].ref_obj_id = id;
>> > }
>> >
>> > + if (func_id == BPF_FUNC_dynptr_data) {
>> > + regs[BPF_REG_0].dynptr_id = meta.initialized_dynptr.id;
>> > + regs[BPF_REG_0].ref_obj_id = meta.initialized_dynptr.ref_obj_id;
>> > + }
>> > +
>> > err = do_refine_retval_range(env, regs, fn->ret_type, func_id, &meta);
>> > if (err)
>> > return err;
>> > @@ -13559,22 +13464,10 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > - ret = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, insn_idx, dynptr_arg_type, clone_ref_obj_id);
>> > + ret = process_dynptr_func(env, regno, insn_idx, dynptr_arg_type, clone_ref_obj_id,
>> > + &meta->initialized_dynptr);
>> > if (ret < 0)
>> > return ret;
>> > -
>> > - if (!(dynptr_arg_type & MEM_UNINIT)) {
>> > - int id = dynptr_id(env, reg);
>> > -
>> > - if (id < 0) {
>> > - verifier_bug(env, "failed to obtain dynptr id");
>> > - return id;
>> > - }
>> > - meta->initialized_dynptr.id = id;
>> > - meta->initialized_dynptr.type = dynptr_get_type(env, reg);
>> > - meta->initialized_dynptr.ref_obj_id = dynptr_ref_obj_id(env, reg);
>> > - }
>> > -
>> > break;
>> > }
>> > case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_ITER:
>> > --
>> > 2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-11 22:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-07 6:44 [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 00/11] Dynptr cleanup and bugfixes Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 01/11] bpf: Set kfunc dynptr arg type flag based on prototype Amery Hung
2026-03-11 14:47 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-11 16:34 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 19:43 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-11 20:01 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 22:37 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-11 23:03 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 23:15 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-12 16:59 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-12 20:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-13 3:25 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-16 20:57 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 02/11] selftests/bpf: Test passing CONST_PTR_TO_DYNPTR to kfunc that may mutate dynptr Amery Hung
2026-03-11 15:26 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-11 16:38 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 16:56 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-16 21:35 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 03/11] bpf: Unify dynptr handling in the verifier Amery Hung
2026-03-11 16:03 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-11 17:23 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 22:22 ` Mykyta Yatsenko [this message]
2026-03-11 22:35 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-11 19:57 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-11 20:16 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-16 22:52 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 04/11] bpf: Assign reg->id when getting referenced kptr from ctx Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 05/11] bpf: Preserve reg->id of pointer objects after null-check Amery Hung
2026-03-11 21:55 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-11 22:26 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-11 22:29 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-11 23:46 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-17 18:49 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 06/11] bpf: Refactor object relationship tracking and fix dynptr UAF bug Amery Hung
2026-03-11 22:32 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-13 20:32 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-12 23:33 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-03-13 20:33 ` Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 07/11] bpf: Remove redundant dynptr arg check for helper Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 08/11] selftests/bpf: Test creating dynptr from dynptr data and slice Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 09/11] selftests/bpf: Test using dynptr after freeing the underlying object Amery Hung
2026-03-16 19:25 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 10/11] selftests/bpf: Test using slice after invalidating dynptr clone Amery Hung
2026-03-07 6:44 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 11/11] selftests/bpf: Test using file dynptr after the reference on file is dropped Amery Hung
2026-03-11 19:38 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next v2 00/11] Dynptr cleanup and bugfixes Andrii Nakryiko
2026-03-13 20:49 ` Amery Hung
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=87fr66t3a7.fsf@gmail.com \
--to=mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.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