Hi Jiri and Alexei, On 05/08/24 10:00, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 5, 2024 at 9:50 AM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Aug 05, 2024 at 11:20:11AM +0200, Juri Lelli wrote: > > > > SNIP > > > > > [ 154.566882] BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 000000000000040c > > > [ 154.573844] #PF: supervisor read access in kernel mode > > > [ 154.578982] #PF: error_code(0x0000) - not-present page > > > [ 154.584122] PGD 146fff067 P4D 146fff067 PUD 10fc00067 PMD 0 > > > [ 154.589780] Oops: Oops: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI > > > [ 154.594659] CPU: 28 UID: 0 PID: 2234 Comm: thread0-13 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.11.0-rc1 #8 > > > [ 154.603179] Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R740/04FC42, BIOS 2.10.2 02/24/2021 > > > [ 154.610744] RIP: 0010:bpf_prog_ec8173ca2868eb50_handle__sched_pi_setprio+0x22/0xd7 > > > [ 154.618310] Code: cc cc cc cc cc cc cc cc 0f 1f 44 00 00 66 90 55 48 89 e5 48 81 ec 30 00 00 00 53 41 55 41 56 48 89 fb 4c 8b 6b 00 4c 8b 73 08 <41> 8b be 0c 04 00 00 48 83 ff 06 0f 85 9b 00 00 00 41 8b be c0 09 > > > [ 154.637052] RSP: 0018:ffffabac60aebbc0 EFLAGS: 00010086 > > > [ 154.642278] RAX: ffffffffc03fba5c RBX: ffffabac60aebc28 RCX: 000000000000001f > > > [ 154.649411] RDX: ffff95a90b4e4180 RSI: ffffabac4e639048 RDI: ffffabac60aebc28 > > > [ 154.656544] RBP: ffffabac60aebc08 R08: 00000023fce7674a R09: ffff95a91d85af38 > > > [ 154.663674] R10: ffff95a91d85a0c0 R11: 000000003357e518 R12: 0000000000000000 > > > [ 154.670807] R13: ffff95a90b4e4180 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000001 > > > [ 154.677939] FS: 00007ffa6d600640(0000) GS:ffff95c01bf00000(0000) knlGS:0000000000000000 > > > [ 154.686026] CS: 0010 DS: 0000 ES: 0000 CR0: 0000000080050033 > > > [ 154.691769] CR2: 000000000000040c CR3: 000000014b9f2005 CR4: 00000000007706f0 > > > [ 154.698903] DR0: 0000000000000000 DR1: 0000000000000000 DR2: 0000000000000000 > > > [ 154.706035] DR3: 0000000000000000 DR6: 00000000fffe0ff0 DR7: 0000000000000400 > > > [ 154.713168] PKRU: 55555554 > > > [ 154.715879] Call Trace: > > > [ 154.718332] <TASK> > > > [ 154.720439] ? __die+0x20/0x70 > > > [ 154.723498] ? page_fault_oops+0x75/0x170 > > > [ 154.727508] ? sysvec_irq_work+0xb/0x90 > > > [ 154.731348] ? exc_page_fault+0x64/0x140 > > > [ 154.735275] ? asm_exc_page_fault+0x22/0x30 > > > [ 154.739461] ? 0xffffffffc03fba5c > > > [ 154.742780] ? bpf_prog_ec8173ca2868eb50_handle__sched_pi_setprio+0x22/0xd7 > > > > hi, > > reproduced.. AFAICS looks like the bpf program somehow lost the booster != NULL > > check and just load the policy field without it and crash when booster is rubbish > > > > int handle__sched_pi_setprio(u64 * ctx): > > ; int handle__sched_pi_setprio(u64 *ctx) > > 0: (bf) r6 = r1 > > ; struct task_struct *boosted = (void *) ctx[0]; > > 1: (79) r7 = *(u64 *)(r6 +0) > > ; struct task_struct *booster = (void *) ctx[1]; > > 2: (79) r8 = *(u64 *)(r6 +8) > > ; if (booster->policy != SCHED_DEADLINE) > > > > curious why the check disappeared, because object file has it, so I guess verifier > > took it out for some reason, will check > > Juri, > > Thanks for flagging! Thanks for the super quick reply from both of you! > Jiri, > > the verifier removes the check because it assumes that pointers > passed by the kernel into tracepoint are valid and trusted. > In this case: > trace_sched_pi_setprio(p, pi_task); > > pi_task can be NULL. > > We cannot make all tracepoint pointers to be PTR_TRUSTED | PTR_MAYBE_NULL > by default, since it will break a bunch of progs. > Instead we can annotate this tracepoint arg as __nullable and > teach the verifier to recognize such special arguments of tracepoints. > > Let's think how to workaround such verifier eagerness to remove != null check. Of course more than willing to test anything out, but no rush. Best, Juri
