From: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx>
Both __this_cpu_inc_return() and __this_cpu_dec() are not preemption
safe and now migrate_disable() doesn't disable preemption, so the update
of prog-active is not atomic and in theory under fully preemptible kernel
recurisve prevention may do not work.
Fixing by using the preemption-safe and IRQ-safe variants.
Fixes: ca06f55b9002 ("bpf: Add per-program recursion prevention mechanism")
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 8 ++++----
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
index ff87e38af8a7..ad76940b02cc 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
@@ -895,7 +895,7 @@ u64 notrace __bpf_prog_enter(struct bpf_prog *prog, struct bpf_tramp_run_ctx *ru
run_ctx->saved_run_ctx = bpf_set_run_ctx(&run_ctx->run_ctx);
- if (unlikely(__this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) != 1)) {
+ if (unlikely(this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) != 1)) {
inc_misses_counter(prog);
return 0;
}
@@ -930,7 +930,7 @@ void notrace __bpf_prog_exit(struct bpf_prog *prog, u64 start, struct bpf_tramp_
bpf_reset_run_ctx(run_ctx->saved_run_ctx);
update_prog_stats(prog, start);
- __this_cpu_dec(*(prog->active));
+ this_cpu_dec(*(prog->active));
migrate_enable();
rcu_read_unlock();
}
@@ -966,7 +966,7 @@ u64 notrace __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable(struct bpf_prog *prog, struct bpf_tramp_r
migrate_disable();
might_fault();
- if (unlikely(__this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) != 1)) {
+ if (unlikely(this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) != 1)) {
inc_misses_counter(prog);
return 0;
}
@@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ void notrace __bpf_prog_exit_sleepable(struct bpf_prog *prog, u64 start,
bpf_reset_run_ctx(run_ctx->saved_run_ctx);
update_prog_stats(prog, start);
- __this_cpu_dec(*(prog->active));
+ this_cpu_dec(*(prog->active));
migrate_enable();
rcu_read_unlock_trace();
}
--
2.29.2
