Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Handle MEM_RCU type properly

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

 



On 11/28/22 6:37 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index c05aa6e1f6f5..6f192dd9025e 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -683,7 +683,7 @@ static inline bool bpf_prog_check_recur(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
  	}
  }
-#define BPF_REG_TRUSTED_MODIFIERS (MEM_ALLOC | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED)
+#define BPF_REG_TRUSTED_MODIFIERS (MEM_ALLOC | PTR_TRUSTED)

[ ... ]

+static bool is_rcu_reg(const struct bpf_reg_state *reg)
+{
+	return reg->type & MEM_RCU;
+}
+
  static int check_pkt_ptr_alignment(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
  				   const struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
  				   int off, int size, bool strict)
@@ -4775,12 +4780,10 @@ static int check_ptr_to_btf_access(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
  		/* Mark value register as MEM_RCU only if it is protected by
  		 * bpf_rcu_read_lock() and the ptr reg is trusted. MEM_RCU
  		 * itself can already indicate trustedness inside the rcu
-		 * read lock region. Also mark it as PTR_TRUSTED.
+		 * read lock region.
  		 */
  		if (!env->cur_state->active_rcu_lock || !is_trusted_reg(reg))
  			flag &= ~MEM_RCU;

How about dereferencing a PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU, like:

	/* parent: PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU */
	parent = current->real_parent;
	/* gparent: PTR_TO_BTF_ID */
	gparent = parent->real_parent;

Should "gparent" have MEM_RCU also?

Also, should PTR_MAYBE_NULL be added to "parent"?
	
-		else
-			flag |= PTR_TRUSTED;
  	} else if (reg->type & MEM_RCU) {
  		/* ptr (reg) is marked as MEM_RCU, but the struct field is not tagged
  		 * with __rcu. Mark the flag as PTR_UNTRUSTED conservatively.
@@ -5945,7 +5948,7 @@ static const struct bpf_reg_types btf_ptr_types = {
  	.types = {
  		PTR_TO_BTF_ID,
  		PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_TRUSTED,
-		PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED,
+		PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU,
  	},
  };
  static const struct bpf_reg_types percpu_btf_ptr_types = {
@@ -6124,7 +6127,7 @@ int check_func_arg_reg_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
  	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
  	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC:
  	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_TRUSTED:
-	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED:
+	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU:
  	case PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_ALLOC | PTR_TRUSTED:
  		/* When referenced PTR_TO_BTF_ID is passed to release function,
  		 * it's fixed offset must be 0.	In the other cases, fixed offset
@@ -8022,6 +8025,11 @@ static bool is_kfunc_destructive(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
  	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_DESTRUCTIVE;
  }
+static bool is_kfunc_rcu(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta)
+{
+	return meta->kfunc_flags & KF_RCU;
+}
+
  static bool is_kfunc_arg_kptr_get(struct bpf_kfunc_call_arg_meta *meta, int arg)
  {
  	return arg == 0 && (meta->kfunc_flags & KF_KPTR_GET);
@@ -8706,13 +8714,19 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
  		switch (kf_arg_type) {
  		case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_ALLOC_BTF_ID:
  		case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
-			if (!is_kfunc_trusted_args(meta))
+			if (!is_kfunc_trusted_args(meta) && !is_kfunc_rcu(meta))
  				break;
- if (!is_trusted_reg(reg)) {
-				verbose(env, "R%d must be referenced or trusted\n", regno);
+			if (!is_trusted_reg(reg) && !is_rcu_reg(reg)) {
+				verbose(env, "R%d must be referenced, trusted or rcu\n", regno);
  				return -EINVAL;
  			}
+
+			if (is_kfunc_rcu(meta) != is_rcu_reg(reg)) {

I think is_trusted_reg(reg) should also be acceptable to bpf_task_acquire_rcu().

nit. bpf_task_acquire_not_zero() may be a better kfunc name.

+				verbose(env, "R%d does not match kf arg rcu tagging\n", regno);
+				return -EINVAL;
+			}
+
  			fallthrough;
  		case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_CTX:
  			/* Trusted arguments have the same offset checks as release arguments */
@@ -8823,7 +8837,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_args(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_kfunc_call_
  		case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID:
  			/* Only base_type is checked, further checks are done here */
  			if ((base_type(reg->type) != PTR_TO_BTF_ID ||
-			     bpf_type_has_unsafe_modifiers(reg->type)) &&
+			     (bpf_type_has_unsafe_modifiers(reg->type) && !is_rcu_reg(reg))) &&
  			    !reg2btf_ids[base_type(reg->type)]) {
  				verbose(env, "arg#%d is %s ", i, reg_type_str(env, reg->type));
  				verbose(env, "expected %s or socket\n",
@@ -8938,7 +8952,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
  		} else if (rcu_unlock) {
  			bpf_for_each_reg_in_vstate(env->cur_state, state, reg, ({
  				if (reg->type & MEM_RCU) {
-					reg->type &= ~(MEM_RCU | PTR_TRUSTED);
+					reg->type &= ~MEM_RCU;
  					reg->type |= PTR_UNTRUSTED;
  				}
  			}));
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
index 973f0c5af965..5fbd9edd2c4c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgrp_kfunc.c
@@ -93,10 +93,10 @@ static struct {
  	const char *prog_name;
  	const char *expected_err_msg;
  } failure_tests[] = {
-	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
+	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
  	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_fp", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT cgroup must point"},
  	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_unsafe_kretprobe", "reg type unsupported for arg#0 function"},
-	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
+	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
  	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_null", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT cgroup must point"},
  	{"cgrp_kfunc_acquire_unreleased", "Unreleased reference"},
  	{"cgrp_kfunc_get_non_kptr_param", "arg#0 expected pointer to map value"},
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
index ffd8ef4303c8..80708c073de6 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_kfunc.c
@@ -87,10 +87,10 @@ static struct {
  	const char *prog_name;
  	const char *expected_err_msg;
  } failure_tests[] = {
-	{"task_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
+	{"task_kfunc_acquire_untrusted", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},
  	{"task_kfunc_acquire_fp", "arg#0 pointer type STRUCT task_struct must point"},
  	{"task_kfunc_acquire_unsafe_kretprobe", "reg type unsupported for arg#0 function"},
-	{"task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced or trusted"},
+	{"task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_walked", "R1 must be referenced, trusted or rcu"},

hmm... why this description is changed here? The bpf_task_acquire kfunc-flags has not changed.




[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