From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
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>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Simon Sundberg <simon.sundberg@kau.se>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 1/4] bpf: fix kfunc btf caching for modules
Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 19:46:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZwVv9XR9kFCiqvx3@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241008-fix-kfunc-btf-caching-for-modules-v1-1-dfefd9aa4318@redhat.com>
On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 12:35:16PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> The verifier contains a cache for looking up module BTF objects when
> calling kfuncs defined in modules. This cache uses a 'struct
> bpf_kfunc_btf_tab', which contains a sorted list of BTF objects that
> were already seen in the current verifier run, and the BTF objects are
> looked up by the offset stored in the relocated call instruction using
> bsearch().
>
> The first time a given offset is seen, the module BTF is loaded from the
> file descriptor passed in by libbpf, and stored into the cache. However,
> there's a bug in the code storing the new entry: it stores a pointer to
> the new cache entry, then calls sort() to keep the cache sorted for the
> next lookup using bsearch(), and then returns the entry that was just
> stored through the stored pointer. However, because sort() modifies the
> list of entries in place *by value*, the stored pointer may no longer
> point to the right entry, in which case the wrong BTF object will be
> returned.
>
> The end result of this is an intermittent bug where, if a BPF program
> calls two functions with the same signature in two different modules,
> the function from the wrong module may sometimes end up being called.
> Whether this happens depends on the order of the calls in the BPF
> program (as that affects whether sort() reorders the array of BTF
> objects), making it especially hard to track down. Simon, credited as
> reporter below, spent significant effort analysing and creating a
> reproducer for this issue. The reproducer is added as a selftest in a
> subsequent patch.
>
> The fix is straight forward: simply don't use the stored pointer after
> calling sort(). Since we already have an on-stack pointer to the BTF
> object itself at the point where the function return, just use that, and
> populate it from the cache entry in the branch where the lookup
> succeeds.
>
> Fixes: 2357672c54c3 ("bpf: Introduce BPF support for kernel module function calls")
> Reported-by: Simon Sundberg <simon.sundberg@kau.se>
> Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@redhat.com>
nice catch
Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
jirka
> ---
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 8 +++++++-
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 434de48cd24bd8d9fb008e4a1e9e0ab4d75ef90a..98d866ba90bf92e3666fb9a07b36f48d452779c6 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -2750,10 +2750,16 @@ static struct btf *__find_kfunc_desc_btf(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
> b->module = mod;
> b->offset = offset;
>
> + /* sort() reorders entries by value, so b may no longer point
> + * to the right entry after this
> + */
> sort(tab->descs, tab->nr_descs, sizeof(tab->descs[0]),
> kfunc_btf_cmp_by_off, NULL);
> + } else {
> + btf = b->btf;
> }
> - return b->btf;
> +
> + return btf;
> }
>
> void bpf_free_kfunc_btf_tab(struct bpf_kfunc_btf_tab *tab)
>
> --
> 2.47.0
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-08 17:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-08 10:35 [PATCH bpf 0/4] Fix caching of BTF for kfuncs in the verifier Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 10:35 ` [PATCH bpf 1/4] bpf: fix kfunc btf caching for modules Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 17:46 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2024-10-09 1:43 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2024-10-08 10:35 ` [PATCH bpf 2/4] selftests/bpf: Consolidate kernel modules into common directory Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 17:46 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-10-08 17:55 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 18:18 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-10-08 18:23 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-09 2:08 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-10-09 7:39 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-09 23:36 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-10-10 8:59 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 10:35 ` [PATCH bpf 3/4] selftests/bpf: Provide a generic [un]load_module helper Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 17:54 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-10-09 1:44 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2024-10-08 10:35 ` [PATCH bpf 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add test for kfunc module order Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-08 17:46 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-10-08 18:05 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2024-10-09 2:09 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=ZwVv9XR9kFCiqvx3@krava \
--to=olsajiri@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=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=simon.sundberg@kau.se \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=toke@redhat.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