[PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: fix a bpf_timer initialization issue

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



The patch in [1] intends to fix a bpf_timer related issue,
but the fix caused existing 'timer' selftest to fail with
hang or some random errors. After some debug, I found
an issue with check_and_init_map_value() in the hashtab.c.
More specifically, in hashtab.c, we have code
  l_new = bpf_map_kmalloc_node(&htab->map, ...)
  check_and_init_map_value(&htab->map, l_new...)
Note that bpf_map_kmalloc_node() does not do initialization
so l_new contains random value.

The function check_and_init_map_value() intends to zero the
bpf_spin_lock and bpf_timer if they exist in the map.
But I found bpf_spin_lock is zero'ed but bpf_timer is not zero'ed.
With [1], later copy_map_value() skips copying of
bpf_spin_lock and bpf_timer. The non-zero bpf_timer caused
random failures for 'timer' selftest.
Without [1], for both bpf_spin_lock and bpf_timer case,
bpf_timer will be zero'ed, so 'timer' self test is okay.

For check_and_init_map_value(), why bpf_spin_lock is zero'ed
properly while bpf_timer not. In bpf uapi header, we have
  struct bpf_spin_lock {
        __u32   val;
  };
  struct bpf_timer {
        __u64 :64;
        __u64 :64;
  } __attribute__((aligned(8)));

The initialization code:
  *(struct bpf_spin_lock *)(dst + map->spin_lock_off) =
      (struct bpf_spin_lock){};
  *(struct bpf_timer *)(dst + map->timer_off) =
      (struct bpf_timer){};
It appears the compiler has no obligation to initialize anonymous fields.
For example, let us use clang with bpf target as below:
  $ cat t.c
  struct bpf_timer {
        unsigned long long :64;
  };
  struct bpf_timer2 {
        unsigned long long a;
  };

  void test(struct bpf_timer *t) {
    *t = (struct bpf_timer){};
  }
  void test2(struct bpf_timer2 *t) {
    *t = (struct bpf_timer2){};
  }
  $ clang -target bpf -O2 -c -g t.c
  $ llvm-objdump -d t.o
   ...
   0000000000000000 <test>:
       0:       95 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 exit
   0000000000000008 <test2>:
       1:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
       2:       7b 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r1 + 0) = r2
       3:       95 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 exit

To fix the problem, let use memset for bpf_timer case in
check_and_init_map_value(). For consistency, memset is also
used for bpf_spin_lock case.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220209070324.1093182-2-memxor@xxxxxxxxx/

Fixes: 68134668c17f3 ("bpf: Add map side support for bpf timers.")
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx>
---
 include/linux/bpf.h | 6 ++----
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index fa517ae604ad..1a4c73742a1f 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -209,11 +209,9 @@ static inline bool map_value_has_timer(const struct bpf_map *map)
 static inline void check_and_init_map_value(struct bpf_map *map, void *dst)
 {
 	if (unlikely(map_value_has_spin_lock(map)))
-		*(struct bpf_spin_lock *)(dst + map->spin_lock_off) =
-			(struct bpf_spin_lock){};
+		memset(dst + map->spin_lock_off, 0, sizeof(struct bpf_spin_lock));
 	if (unlikely(map_value_has_timer(map)))
-		*(struct bpf_timer *)(dst + map->timer_off) =
-			(struct bpf_timer){};
+		memset(dst + map->timer_off, 0, sizeof(struct bpf_timer));
 }
 
 /* copy everything but bpf_spin_lock and bpf_timer. There could be one of each. */
-- 
2.30.2





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux