The function are defined in the verifier.c file, but not called
elsewhere, so delete the unused function.
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:3448:20: warning: unused function 'bt_set_slot'
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:3453:20: warning: unused function 'bt_clear_slot'
kernel/bpf/verifier.c:3488:20: warning: unused function 'bt_is_slot_set'
Reported-by: Abaci Robot <abaci@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Yang Li <yang.lee@linux.alibaba.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231212005436.103829-1-yang.lee@linux.alibaba.com
Closes: https://bugzilla.openanolis.cn/show_bug.cgi?id=7714
Use the fact that we are passing subprog index around and have
a corresponding struct bpf_subprog_info in bpf_verifier_env for each
subprogram. We don't need to separately pass around a flag whether
subprog is exception callback or not, each relevant verifier function
can determine this using provided subprog index if we maintain
bpf_subprog_info properly.
Also move out exception callback-specific logic from
btf_prepare_func_args(), keeping it generic. We can enforce all these
restriction right before exception callback verification pass. We add
out parameter, arg_cnt, for now, but this will be unnecessary with
subsequent refactoring and will be removed.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231204233931.49758-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
When verifier validates BPF_ST_MEM instruction that stores known
constant to stack (e.g., *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 123), it effectively spills
a fake register with a constant (but initially imprecise) value to
a stack slot. Because read-side logic treats it as a proper register
fill from stack slot, we need to mark such stack slot initialization as
INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS instruction to stop precision backtracking from
missing it.
Fixes: 41f6f64e69 ("bpf: support non-r10 register spill/fill to/from stack in precision tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231209010958.66758-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Push the rounding up of stack offsets into the function responsible for
growing the stack, rather than relying on all the callers to do it.
Uncertainty about whether the callers did it or not tripped up people in
a previous review.
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231208032519.260451-4-andreimatei1@gmail.com
Privileged programs are supposed to be able to read uninitialized stack
memory (ever since 6715df8d5) but, before this patch, these accesses
were permitted inconsistently. In particular, accesses were permitted
above state->allocated_stack, but not below it. In other words, if the
stack was already "large enough", the access was permitted, but
otherwise the access was rejected instead of being allowed to "grow the
stack". This undesired rejection was happening in two places:
- in check_stack_slot_within_bounds()
- in check_stack_range_initialized()
This patch arranges for these accesses to be permitted. A bunch of tests
that were relying on the old rejection had to change; all of them were
changed to add also run unprivileged, in which case the old behavior
persists. One tests couldn't be updated - global_func16 - because it
can't run unprivileged for other reasons.
This patch also fixes the tracking of the stack size for variable-offset
reads. This second fix is bundled in the same commit as the first one
because they're inter-related. Before this patch, writes to the stack
using registers containing a variable offset (as opposed to registers
with fixed, known values) were not properly contributing to the
function's needed stack size. As a result, it was possible for a program
to verify, but then to attempt to read out-of-bounds data at runtime
because a too small stack had been allocated for it.
Each function tracks the size of the stack it needs in
bpf_subprog_info.stack_depth, which is maintained by
update_stack_depth(). For regular memory accesses, check_mem_access()
was calling update_state_depth() but it was passing in only the fixed
part of the offset register, ignoring the variable offset. This was
incorrect; the minimum possible value of that register should be used
instead.
This tracking is now fixed by centralizing the tracking of stack size in
grow_stack_state(), and by lifting the calls to grow_stack_state() to
check_stack_access_within_bounds() as suggested by Andrii. The code is
now simpler and more convincingly tracks the correct maximum stack size.
check_stack_range_initialized() can now rely on enough stack having been
allocated for the access; this helps with the fix for the first issue.
A few tests were changed to also check the stack depth computation. The
one that fails without this patch is verifier_var_off:stack_write_priv_vs_unpriv.
Fixes: 01f810ace9 ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231208032519.260451-3-andreimatei1@gmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CABWLsev9g8UP_c3a=1qbuZUi20tGoUXoU07FPf-5FLvhOKOY+Q@mail.gmail.com/
This patch promotes the arithmetic around checking stack bounds to be
done in the 64-bit domain, instead of the current 32bit. The arithmetic
implies adding together a 64-bit register with a int offset. The
register was checked to be below 1<<29 when it was variable, but not
when it was fixed. The offset either comes from an instruction (in which
case it is 16 bit), from another register (in which case the caller
checked it to be below 1<<29 [1]), or from the size of an argument to a
kfunc (in which case it can be a u32 [2]). Between the register being
inconsistently checked to be below 1<<29, and the offset being up to an
u32, it appears that we were open to overflowing the `int`s which were
currently used for arithmetic.
[1] 815fb87b75/kernel/bpf/verifier.c (L7494-L7498)
[2] 815fb87b75/kernel/bpf/verifier.c (L11904)
Reported-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231207041150.229139-4-andreimatei1@gmail.com
This patch fixes a bug around the verification of possibly-zero-sized
stack accesses. When the access was done through a var-offset stack
pointer, check_stack_access_within_bounds was incorrectly computing the
maximum-offset of a zero-sized read to be the same as the register's min
offset. Instead, we have to take in account the register's maximum
possible value. The patch also simplifies how the max offset is checked;
the check is now simpler than for min offset.
The bug was allowing accesses to erroneously pass the
check_stack_access_within_bounds() checks, only to later crash in
check_stack_range_initialized() when all the possibly-affected stack
slots are iterated (this time with a correct max offset).
check_stack_range_initialized() is relying on
check_stack_access_within_bounds() for its accesses to the
stack-tracking vector to be within bounds; in the case of zero-sized
accesses, we were essentially only verifying that the lowest possible
slot was within bounds. We would crash when the max-offset of the stack
pointer was >= 0 (which shouldn't pass verification, and hopefully is
not something anyone's code attempts to do in practice).
Thanks Hao for reporting!
Fixes: 01f810ace9 ("bpf: Allow variable-offset stack access")
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231207041150.229139-2-andreimatei1@gmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CACkBjsZGEUaRCHsmaX=h-efVogsRfK1FPxmkgb0Os_frnHiNdw@mail.gmail.com/
Remove remaining direct queries to perfmon_capable() and bpf_capable()
in BPF verifier logic and instead use BPF token (if available) to make
decisions about privileges.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231130185229.2688956-9-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Similar to special handling of STACK_ZERO, when reading 1/2/4 bytes from
stack from slot that has register spilled into it and that register has
a constant value zero, preserve that zero and mark spilled register as
precise for that. This makes spilled const zero register and STACK_ZERO
cases equivalent in their behavior.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-7-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Instead of always forcing STACK_ZERO slots to STACK_MISC, preserve it in
situations where this is possible. E.g., when spilling register as
1/2/4-byte subslots on the stack, all the remaining bytes in the stack
slot do not automatically become unknown. If we knew they contained
zeroes, we can preserve those STACK_ZERO markers.
Add a helper mark_stack_slot_misc(), similar to scrub_spilled_slot(),
but that doesn't overwrite either STACK_INVALID nor STACK_ZERO. Note
that we need to take into account possibility of being in unprivileged
mode, in which case STACK_INVALID is forced to STACK_MISC for correctness,
as treating STACK_INVALID as equivalent STACK_MISC is only enabled in
privileged mode.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-5-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
When register is spilled onto a stack as a 1/2/4-byte register, we set
slot_type[BPF_REG_SIZE - 1] (plus potentially few more below it,
depending on actual spill size). So to check if some stack slot has
spilled register we need to consult slot_type[7], not slot_type[0].
To avoid the need to remember and double-check this in the future, just
use is_spilled_reg() helper.
Fixes: 27113c59b6 ("bpf: Check the other end of slot_type for STACK_SPILL")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use instruction (jump) history to record instructions that performed
register spill/fill to/from stack, regardless if this was done through
read-only r10 register, or any other register after copying r10 into it
*and* potentially adjusting offset.
To make this work reliably, we push extra per-instruction flags into
instruction history, encoding stack slot index (spi) and stack frame
number in extra 10 bit flags we take away from prev_idx in instruction
history. We don't touch idx field for maximum performance, as it's
checked most frequently during backtracking.
This change removes basically the last remaining practical limitation of
precision backtracking logic in BPF verifier. It fixes known
deficiencies, but also opens up new opportunities to reduce number of
verified states, explored in the subsequent patches.
There are only three differences in selftests' BPF object files
according to veristat, all in the positive direction (less states).
File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)
-------------------------------------- ------------- --------- --------- ------------- ---------- ---------- -------------
test_cls_redirect_dynptr.bpf.linked3.o cls_redirect 2987 2864 -123 (-4.12%) 240 231 -9 (-3.75%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_tc 82848 82661 -187 (-0.23%) 5107 5073 -34 (-0.67%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_xdp 85116 84964 -152 (-0.18%) 5162 5130 -32 (-0.62%)
Note, I avoided renaming jmp_history to more generic insn_hist to
minimize number of lines changed and potential merge conflicts between
bpf and bpf-next trees.
Notice also cur_hist_entry pointer reset to NULL at the beginning of
instruction verification loop. This pointer avoids the problem of
relying on last jump history entry's insn_idx to determine whether we
already have entry for current instruction or not. It can happen that we
added jump history entry because current instruction is_jmp_point(), but
also we need to add instruction flags for stack access. In this case, we
don't want to entries, so we need to reuse last added entry, if it is
present.
Relying on insn_idx comparison has the same ambiguity problem as the one
that was fixed recently in [0], so we avoid that.
[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20231110002638.4168352-3-andrii@kernel.org/
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@epfl.ch>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
When removing the inner map from the outer map, the inner map will be
freed after one RCU grace period and one RCU tasks trace grace
period, so it is certain that the bpf program, which may access the
inner map, has exited before the inner map is freed.
However there is no need to wait for one RCU tasks trace grace period if
the outer map is only accessed by non-sleepable program. So adding
sleepable_refcnt in bpf_map and increasing sleepable_refcnt when adding
the outer map into env->used_maps for sleepable program. Although the
max number of bpf program is INT_MAX - 1, the number of bpf programs
which are being loaded may be greater than INT_MAX, so using atomic64_t
instead of atomic_t for sleepable_refcnt. When removing the inner map
from the outer map, using sleepable_refcnt to decide whether or not a
RCU tasks trace grace period is needed before freeing the inner map.
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231204140425.1480317-6-houtao@huaweicloud.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Given we enforce a valid range for program and async callback return
value, we must mark R0 as precise to avoid incorrect state pruning.
Fixes: b5dc0163d8 ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-9-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use common logic to verify program return values and async callback
return values. This allows to avoid duplication of any extra steps
necessary, like precision marking, which will be added in the next
patch.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-8-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Similarly to subprog/callback logic, enforce return value of BPF program
using more precise smin/smax range.
We need to adjust a bunch of tests due to a changed format of an error
message.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-7-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Instead of relying on potentially imprecise tnum representation of
expected return value range for callbacks and subprogs, validate that
smin/smax range satisfy exact expected range of return values.
E.g., if callback would need to return [0, 2] range, tnum can't
represent this precisely and instead will allow [0, 3] range. By
checking smin/smax range, we can make sure that subprog/callback indeed
returns only valid [0, 2] range.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-5-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Given verifier checks actual value, r0 has to be precise, so we need to
propagate precision properly. r0 also has to be marked as read,
otherwise subsequent state comparisons will ignore such register as
unimportant and precision won't really help here.
Fixes: 69c087ba62 ("bpf: Add bpf_for_each_map_elem() helper")
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231202175705.885270-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Slightly change BPF verifier logic around eagerness and order of global
subprog validation. Instead of going over every global subprog eagerly
and validating it before main (entry) BPF program is verified, turn it
around. Validate main program first, mark subprogs that were called from
main program for later verification, but otherwise assume it is valid.
Afterwards, go over marked global subprogs and validate those,
potentially marking some more global functions as being called. Continue
this process until all (transitively) callable global subprogs are
validated. It's a BFS traversal at its heart and will always converge.
This is an important change because it allows to feature-gate some
subprograms that might not be verifiable on some older kernel, depending
on supported set of features.
E.g., at some point, global functions were allowed to accept a pointer
to memory, which size is identified by user-provided type.
Unfortunately, older kernels don't support this feature. With BPF CO-RE
approach, the natural way would be to still compile BPF object file once
and guard calls to this global subprog with some CO-RE check or using
.rodata variables. That's what people do to guard usage of new helpers
or kfuncs, and any other new BPF-side feature that might be missing on
old kernels.
That's currently impossible to do with global subprogs, unfortunately,
because they are eagerly and unconditionally validated. This patch set
aims to change this, so that in the future when global funcs gain new
features, those can be guarded using BPF CO-RE techniques in the same
fashion as any other new kernel feature.
Two selftests had to be adjusted in sync with these changes.
test_global_func12 relied on eager global subprog validation failing
before main program failure is detected (unknown return value). Fix by
making sure that main program is always valid.
verifier_subprog_precision's parent_stack_slot_precise subtest relied on
verifier checkpointing heuristic to do a checkpoint at instruction #5,
but that's no longer true because we don't have enough jumps validated
before reaching insn #5 due to global subprogs being validated later.
Other than that, no changes, as one would expect.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231124035937.403208-3-andrii@kernel.org
We have the name, instead of emitting just func#N to identify global
subprog, augment verifier log messages with actual function name to make
it more user-friendly.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231124035937.403208-2-andrii@kernel.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
iHUEABYIAB0WIQTFp0I1jqZrAX+hPRXbK58LschIgwUCZV0kjgAKCRDbK58LschI
gy0EAP9XwncW2OhO72DpITluFzvWPgB0N97OANKBXjzKJrRAlQD/aUe9nlvBQuad
WsbMKLeC4wvI2X/4PEIR4ukbuZ3ypAA=
=LMVg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Merge tag 'for-netdev' of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next
Daniel Borkmann says:
====================
pull-request: bpf-next 2023-11-21
We've added 85 non-merge commits during the last 12 day(s) which contain
a total of 63 files changed, 4464 insertions(+), 1484 deletions(-).
The main changes are:
1) Huge batch of verifier changes to improve BPF register bounds logic
and range support along with a large test suite, and verifier log
improvements, all from Andrii Nakryiko.
2) Add a new kfunc which acquires the associated cgroup of a task within
a specific cgroup v1 hierarchy where the latter is identified by its id,
from Yafang Shao.
3) Extend verifier to allow bpf_refcount_acquire() of a map value field
obtained via direct load which is a use-case needed in sched_ext,
from Dave Marchevsky.
4) Fix bpf_get_task_stack() helper to add the correct crosstask check
for the get_perf_callchain(), from Jordan Rome.
5) Fix BPF task_iter internals where lockless usage of next_thread()
was wrong. The rework also simplifies the code, from Oleg Nesterov.
6) Fix uninitialized tail padding via LIBBPF_OPTS_RESET, and another
fix for certain BPF UAPI structs to fix verifier failures seen
in bpf_dynptr usage, from Yonghong Song.
7) Add BPF selftest fixes for map_percpu_stats flakes due to per-CPU BPF
memory allocator not being able to allocate per-CPU pointer successfully,
from Hou Tao.
8) Add prep work around dynptr and string handling for kfuncs which
is later going to be used by file verification via BPF LSM and fsverity,
from Song Liu.
9) Improve BPF selftests to update multiple prog_tests to use ASSERT_*
macros, from Yuran Pereira.
10) Optimize LPM trie lookup to check prefixlen before walking the trie,
from Florian Lehner.
11) Consolidate virtio/9p configs from BPF selftests in config.vm file
given they are needed consistently across archs, from Manu Bretelle.
12) Small BPF verifier refactor to remove register_is_const(),
from Shung-Hsi Yu.
* tag 'for-netdev' of https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next: (85 commits)
selftests/bpf: Replaces the usage of CHECK calls for ASSERTs in vmlinux
selftests/bpf: Replaces the usage of CHECK calls for ASSERTs in bpf_obj_id
selftests/bpf: Replaces the usage of CHECK calls for ASSERTs in bind_perm
selftests/bpf: Replaces the usage of CHECK calls for ASSERTs in bpf_tcp_ca
selftests/bpf: reduce verboseness of reg_bounds selftest logs
bpf: bpf_iter_task_next: use next_task(kit->task) rather than next_task(kit->pos)
bpf: bpf_iter_task_next: use __next_thread() rather than next_thread()
bpf: task_group_seq_get_next: use __next_thread() rather than next_thread()
bpf: emit frameno for PTR_TO_STACK regs if it differs from current one
bpf: smarter verifier log number printing logic
bpf: omit default off=0 and imm=0 in register state log
bpf: emit map name in register state if applicable and available
bpf: print spilled register state in stack slot
bpf: extract register state printing
bpf: move verifier state printing code to kernel/bpf/log.c
bpf: move verbose_linfo() into kernel/bpf/log.c
bpf: rename BPF_F_TEST_SANITY_STRICT to BPF_F_TEST_REG_INVARIANTS
bpf: Remove test for MOVSX32 with offset=32
selftests/bpf: add iter test requiring range x range logic
veristat: add ability to set BPF_F_TEST_SANITY_STRICT flag with -r flag
...
====================
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231122000500.28126-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
In some cases verifier can't infer convergence of the bpf_loop()
iteration. E.g. for the following program:
static int cb(__u32 idx, struct num_context* ctx)
{
ctx->i++;
return 0;
}
SEC("?raw_tp")
int prog(void *_)
{
struct num_context ctx = { .i = 0 };
__u8 choice_arr[2] = { 0, 1 };
bpf_loop(2, cb, &ctx, 0);
return choice_arr[ctx.i];
}
Each 'cb' simulation would eventually return to 'prog' and reach
'return choice_arr[ctx.i]' statement. At which point ctx.i would be
marked precise, thus forcing verifier to track multitude of separate
states with {.i=0}, {.i=1}, ... at bpf_loop() callback entry.
This commit allows "brute force" handling for such cases by limiting
number of callback body simulations using 'umax' value of the first
bpf_loop() parameter.
For this, extend bpf_func_state with 'callback_depth' field.
Increment this field when callback visiting state is pushed to states
traversal stack. For frame #N it's 'callback_depth' field counts how
many times callback with frame depth N+1 had been executed.
Use bpf_func_state specifically to allow independent tracking of
callback depths when multiple nested bpf_loop() calls are present.
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-11-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Callbacks are similar to open coded iterators, so add imprecise
widening logic for callback body processing. This makes callback based
loops behave identically to open coded iterators, e.g. allowing to
verify programs like below:
struct ctx { u32 i; };
int cb(u32 idx, struct ctx* ctx)
{
++ctx->i;
return 0;
}
...
struct ctx ctx = { .i = 0 };
bpf_loop(100, cb, &ctx, 0);
...
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-9-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Prior to this patch callbacks were handled as regular function calls,
execution of callback body was modeled exactly once.
This patch updates callbacks handling logic as follows:
- introduces a function push_callback_call() that schedules callback
body verification in env->head stack;
- updates prepare_func_exit() to reschedule callback body verification
upon BPF_EXIT;
- as calls to bpf_*_iter_next(), calls to callback invoking functions
are marked as checkpoints;
- is_state_visited() is updated to stop callback based iteration when
some identical parent state is found.
Paths with callback function invoked zero times are now verified first,
which leads to necessity to modify some selftests:
- the following negative tests required adding release/unlock/drop
calls to avoid previously masked unrelated error reports:
- cb_refs.c:underflow_prog
- exceptions_fail.c:reject_rbtree_add_throw
- exceptions_fail.c:reject_with_cp_reference
- the following precision tracking selftests needed change in expected
log trace:
- verifier_subprog_precision.c:callback_result_precise
(note: r0 precision is no longer propagated inside callback and
I think this is a correct behavior)
- verifier_subprog_precision.c:parent_callee_saved_reg_precise_with_callback
- verifier_subprog_precision.c:parent_stack_slot_precise_with_callback
Reported-by: Andrew Werner <awerner32@gmail.com>
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CA+vRuzPChFNXmouzGG+wsy=6eMcfr1mFG0F3g7rbg-sedGKW3w@mail.gmail.com/
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-7-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Move code for simulated stack frame creation to a separate utility
function. This function would be used in the follow-up change for
callbacks handling.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-6-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Split check_reg_arg() into two utility functions:
- check_reg_arg() operating on registers from current verifier state;
- __check_reg_arg() operating on a specific set of registers passed as
a parameter;
The __check_reg_arg() function would be used by a follow-up change for
callbacks handling.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231121020701.26440-5-eddyz87@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Move a good chunk of code from verifier.c to log.c: verifier state
verbose printing logic. This is an important and very much
logging/debugging oriented code. It fits the overlall log.c's focus on
verifier logging, and moving it allows to keep growing it without
unnecessarily adding to verifier.c code that otherwise contains a core
verification logic.
There are not many shared dependencies between this code and the rest of
verifier.c code, except a few single-line helpers for various register
type checks and a bit of state "scratching" helpers. We move all such
trivial helpers into include/bpf/bpf_verifier.h as static inlines.
No functional changes in this patch.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231118034623.3320920-3-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
verifier.c is huge. Let's try to move out parts that are logging-related
into log.c, as we previously did with bpf_log() and other related stuff.
This patch moves line info verbose output routines: it's pretty
self-contained and isolated code, so there is no problem with this.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231118034623.3320920-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
This change doesn't seem to have any effect on selftests and production
BPF object files, but we preemptively try to make it more robust.
First, "learn sign from signed bounds" comment is misleading, as we are
learning not just sign, but also values.
Second, we simplify the check for determining whether entire range is
positive or negative similarly to other checks added earlier, using
appropriate u32/u64 cast and single comparisons. As explain in comments
in __reg64_deduce_bounds(), the checks are equivalent.
Last but not least, smin/smax and s32_min/s32_max reassignment based on
min/max of both umin/umax and smin/smax (and 32-bit equivalents) is hard
to explain and justify. We are updating unsigned bounds from signed
bounds, why would we update signed bounds at the same time? This might
be correct, but it's far from obvious why and the code or comments don't
try to justify this. Given we've added a separate deduction of signed
bounds from unsigned bounds earlier, this seems at least redundant, if
not just wrong.
In short, we remove doubtful pieces, and streamline the rest to follow
the logic and approach of the rest of reg_bounds_sync() checks.
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-7-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Equivalent checks were recently added in more succinct and, arguably,
safer form in:
- f188765f23a5 ("bpf: derive smin32/smax32 from umin32/umax32 bounds");
- 2e74aef782d3 ("bpf: derive smin/smax from umin/max bounds").
The checks we are removing in this patch set do similar checks to detect
if entire u32/u64 range has signed bit set or not set, but does it with
two separate checks.
Further, we forcefully overwrite either smin or smax (and 32-bit equvalents)
without applying normal min/max intersection logic. It's not clear why
that would be correct in all cases and seems to work by accident. This
logic is also "gated" by previous signed -> unsigned derivation, which
returns early.
All this is quite confusing and seems error-prone, while we already have
at least equivalent checks happening earlier. So remove this duplicate
and error-prone logic to simplify things a bit.
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-6-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Add simple sanity checks that validate well-formed ranges (min <= max)
across u64, s64, u32, and s32 ranges. Also for cases when the value is
constant (either 64-bit or 32-bit), we validate that ranges and tnums
are in agreement.
These bounds checks are performed at the end of BPF_ALU/BPF_ALU64
operations, on conditional jumps, and for LDX instructions (where subreg
zero/sign extension is probably the most important to check). This
covers most of the interesting cases.
Also, we validate the sanity of the return register when manually
adjusting it for some special helpers.
By default, sanity violation will trigger a warning in verifier log and
resetting register bounds to "unbounded" ones. But to aid development
and debugging, BPF_F_TEST_SANITY_STRICT flag is added, which will
trigger hard failure of verification with -EFAULT on register bounds
violations. This allows selftests to catch such issues. veristat will
also gain a CLI option to enable this behavior.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-5-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use 32-bit subranges to prune some 64-bit BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE conditions
that otherwise would be "inconclusive" (i.e., is_branch_taken() would
return -1). This can happen, for example, when registers are initialized
as 64-bit u64/s64, then compared for inequality as 32-bit subregisters,
and then followed by 64-bit equality/inequality check. That 32-bit
inequality can establish some pattern for lower 32 bits of a register
(e.g., s< 0 condition determines whether the bit #31 is zero or not),
while overall 64-bit value could be anything (according to a value range
representation).
This is not a fancy quirky special case, but actually a handling that's
necessary to prevent correctness issue with BPF verifier's range
tracking: set_range_min_max() assumes that register ranges are
non-overlapping, and if that condition is not guaranteed by
is_branch_taken() we can end up with invalid ranges, where min > max.
[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CACkBjsY2q1_fUohD7hRmKGqv1MV=eP2f6XK8kjkYNw7BaiF8iQ@mail.gmail.com/
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Generalize is_branch_taken logic for SCALAR_VALUE register to handle
cases when both registers are not constants. Previously supported
<range> vs <scalar> cases are a natural subset of more generic <range>
vs <range> set of cases.
Generalized logic relies on straightforward segment intersection checks.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-3-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Generalize bounds adjustment logic of reg_set_min_max() to handle not
just register vs constant case, but in general any register vs any
register cases. For most of the operations it's trivial extension based
on range vs range comparison logic, we just need to properly pick
min/max of a range to compare against min/max of the other range.
For BPF_JSET we keep the original capabilities, just make sure JSET is
integrated in the common framework. This is manifested in the
internal-only BPF_JSET + BPF_X "opcode" to allow for simpler and more
uniform rev_opcode() handling. See the code for details. This allows to
reuse the same code exactly both for TRUE and FALSE branches without
explicitly handling both conditions with custom code.
Note also that now we don't need a special handling of BPF_JEQ/BPF_JNE
case none of the registers are constants. This is now just a normal
generic case handled by reg_set_min_max().
To make tnum handling cleaner, tnum_with_subreg() helper is added, as
that's a common operator when dealing with 32-bit subregister bounds.
This keeps the overall logic much less noisy when it comes to tnums.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231112010609.848406-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Kirill Shutemov reported significant percpu memory consumption increase after
booting in 288-cpu VM ([1]) due to commit 41a5db8d81 ("bpf: Add support for
non-fix-size percpu mem allocation"). The percpu memory consumption is
increased from 111MB to 969MB. The number is from /proc/meminfo.
I tried to reproduce the issue with my local VM which at most supports upto
255 cpus. With 252 cpus, without the above commit, the percpu memory
consumption immediately after boot is 57MB while with the above commit the
percpu memory consumption is 231MB.
This is not good since so far percpu memory from bpf memory allocator is not
widely used yet. Let us change pre-allocation in init stage to on-demand
allocation when verifier detects there is a need of percpu memory for bpf
program. With this change, percpu memory consumption after boot can be reduced
signicantly.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20231109154934.4saimljtqx625l3v@box.shutemov.name/
Fixes: 41a5db8d81 ("bpf: Add support for non-fix-size percpu mem allocation")
Reported-and-tested-by: Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Acked-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231111013928.948838-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
When BPF program is verified in privileged mode, BPF verifier allows
bounded loops. This means that from CFG point of view there are
definitely some back-edges. Original commit adjusted check_cfg() logic
to not detect back-edges in control flow graph if they are resulting
from conditional jumps, which the idea that subsequent full BPF
verification process will determine whether such loops are bounded or
not, and either accept or reject the BPF program. At least that's my
reading of the intent.
Unfortunately, the implementation of this idea doesn't work correctly in
all possible situations. Conditional jump might not result in immediate
back-edge, but just a few unconditional instructions later we can arrive
at back-edge. In such situations check_cfg() would reject BPF program
even in privileged mode, despite it might be bounded loop. Next patch
adds one simple program demonstrating such scenario.
To keep things simple, instead of trying to detect back edges in
privileged mode, just assume every back edge is valid and let subsequent
BPF verification prove or reject bounded loops.
Note a few test changes. For unknown reason, we have a few tests that
are specified to detect a back-edge in a privileged mode, but looking at
their code it seems like the right outcome is passing check_cfg() and
letting subsequent verification to make a decision about bounded or not
bounded looping.
Bounded recursion case is also interesting. The example should pass, as
recursion is limited to just a few levels and so we never reach maximum
number of nested frames and never exhaust maximum stack depth. But the
way that max stack depth logic works today it falsely detects this as
exceeding max nested frame count. This patch series doesn't attempt to
fix this orthogonal problem, so we just adjust expected verifier failure.
Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Fixes: 2589726d12 ("bpf: introduce bounded loops")
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231110061412.2995786-1-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Fix an edge case in __mark_chain_precision() which prematurely stops
backtracking instructions in a state if it happens that state's first
and last instruction indexes are the same. This situations doesn't
necessarily mean that there were no instructions simulated in a state,
but rather that we starting from the instruction, jumped around a bit,
and then ended up at the same instruction before checkpointing or
marking precision.
To distinguish between these two possible situations, we need to consult
jump history. If it's empty or contain a single record "bridging" parent
state and first instruction of processed state, then we indeed
backtracked all instructions in this state. But if history is not empty,
we are definitely not done yet.
Move this logic inside get_prev_insn_idx() to contain it more nicely.
Use -ENOENT return code to denote "we are out of instructions"
situation.
This bug was exposed by verifier_loop1.c's bounded_recursion subtest, once
the next fix in this patch set is applied.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Fixes: b5dc0163d8 ("bpf: precise scalar_value tracking")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231110002638.4168352-3-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
ldimm64 instructions are 16-byte long, and so have to be handled
appropriately in check_cfg(), just like the rest of BPF verifier does.
This has implications in three places:
- when determining next instruction for non-jump instructions;
- when determining next instruction for callback address ldimm64
instructions (in visit_func_call_insn());
- when checking for unreachable instructions, where second half of
ldimm64 is expected to be unreachable;
We take this also as an opportunity to report jump into the middle of
ldimm64. And adjust few test_verifier tests accordingly.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Fixes: 475fb78fbf ("bpf: verifier (add branch/goto checks)")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231110002638.4168352-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
This patch enables the following pattern:
/* mapval contains a __kptr pointing to refcounted local kptr */
mapval = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&map, &idx);
if (!mapval || !mapval->some_kptr) { /* omitted */ }
p = bpf_refcount_acquire(&mapval->some_kptr);
Currently this doesn't work because bpf_refcount_acquire expects an
owning or non-owning ref. The verifier defines non-owning ref as a type:
PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF
while mapval->some_kptr is PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_UNTRUSTED. It's possible
to do the refcount_acquire by first bpf_kptr_xchg'ing mapval->some_kptr
into a temp kptr, refcount_acquiring that, and xchg'ing back into
mapval, but this is unwieldy and shouldn't be necessary.
This patch modifies btf_ld_kptr_type such that user-allocated types are
marked MEM_ALLOC and if those types have a bpf_{rb,list}_node they're
marked NON_OWN_REF as well. Additionally, due to changes to
bpf_obj_drop_impl earlier in this series, rcu_protected_object now
returns true for all user-allocated types, resulting in
mapval->some_kptr being marked MEM_RCU.
After this patch's changes, mapval->some_kptr is now:
PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | NON_OWN_REF | MEM_RCU
which results in it passing the non-owning ref test, and the motivating
example passing verification.
Future work will likely get rid of special non-owning ref lifetime logic
in the verifier, at which point we'll be able to delete the NON_OWN_REF
flag entirely.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231107085639.3016113-6-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
The addition of is_reg_const() in commit 171de12646d2 ("bpf: generalize
is_branch_taken to handle all conditional jumps in one place") has made the
register_is_const() redundant. Give the former has more feature, plus the
fact the latter is only used in one place, replace register_is_const() with
is_reg_const(), and remove the definition of register_is_const.
This requires moving the definition of is_reg_const() further up. And since
the comment of reg_const_value() reference is_reg_const(), move it up as
well.
Signed-off-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231108140043.12282-1-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Similar to ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR for BPF helpers, KF_ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR
specifies kfunc args that point to const strings. Annotation "__str" is
used to specify kfunc arg of type KF_ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR. Also, add
documentation for the "__str" annotation.
bpf_get_file_xattr() will be the first kfunc that uses this type.
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231107045725.2278852-4-song@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR is used to specify constant string args for BPF
helpers. The logic that verifies a reg is ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR is
implemented in check_func_arg().
As we introduce kfuncs with constant string args, it is necessary to
do the same check for kfuncs (in check_kfunc_args). Factor out the logic
for ARG_PTR_TO_CONST_STR to a new check_reg_const_str() so that it can be
reused.
check_func_arg() ensures check_reg_const_str() is only called with reg of
type PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE. Add a redundent type check in check_reg_const_str()
to avoid misuse in the future. Other than this redundent check, there is
no change in behavior.
Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231107045725.2278852-3-song@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Change reg_set_min_max() to take FALSE/TRUE sets of two registers each,
instead of assuming that we are always comparing to a constant. For now
we still assume that right-hand side registers are constants (and make
sure that's the case by swapping src/dst regs, if necessary), but
subsequent patches will remove this limitation.
reg_set_min_max() is now called unconditionally for any register
comparison, so that might include pointer vs pointer. This makes it
consistent with is_branch_taken() generality. But we currently only
support adjustments based on SCALAR vs SCALAR comparisons, so
reg_set_min_max() has to guard itself againts pointers.
Taking two by two registers allows to further unify and simplify
check_cond_jmp_op() logic. We utilize fake register for BPF_K
conditional jump case, just like with is_branch_taken() part.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231102033759.2541186-18-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Similarly to is_branch_taken()-related refactorings, start preparing
reg_set_min_max() to handle more generic case of two non-const
registers. Start with renaming arguments to accommodate later addition
of second register as an input argument.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231102033759.2541186-17-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Combine 32-bit and 64-bit is_branch_taken logic for SCALAR_VALUE
registers. It makes it easier to see parallels between two domains
(32-bit and 64-bit), and makes subsequent refactoring more
straightforward.
No functional changes.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231102033759.2541186-16-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
