On Fri, Aug 18, 2023 at 8:12 AM Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From commit ebf7d1f508a73871 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall
> handling in JIT"), the tailcall on x64 works better than before.
>
> From commit e411901c0b775a3a ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms
> for x64 JIT"), tailcall is able to run in BPF subprograms on x64.
>
> From commit 5b92a28aae4dd0f8 ("bpf: Support attaching tracing BPF program
> to other BPF programs"), BPF program is able to trace other BPF programs.
>
> How about combining them all together?
>
> 1. FENTRY/FEXIT on a BPF subprogram.
> 2. A tailcall runs in the BPF subprogram.
> 3. The tailcall calls itself.
>
> As a result, a tailcall infinite loop comes up. And the loop would halt
> the machine.
>
> As we know, in tail call context, the tail_call_cnt propagates by stack
> and RAX register between BPF subprograms. So do it in trampolines.
>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> include/linux/bpf.h | 5 +++++
> kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 4 ++--
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 31 +++++++++++++++++++++-------
> 4 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> index a5930042139d3..1ad17d7de5eee 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> @@ -303,8 +303,12 @@ static void emit_prologue(u8 **pprog, u32 stack_depth, bool ebpf_from_cbpf,
> prog += X86_PATCH_SIZE;
> if (!ebpf_from_cbpf) {
> if (tail_call_reachable && !is_subprog)
> + /* When it's the entry of the whole tailcall context,
> + * zeroing rax means initialising tail_call_cnt.
> + */
> EMIT2(0x31, 0xC0); /* xor eax, eax */
> else
> + // Keep the same instruction layout.
No c++ style comments please.
> EMIT2(0x66, 0x90); /* nop2 */
> }
> EMIT1(0x55); /* push rbp */
> @@ -1018,6 +1022,10 @@ static void emit_shiftx(u8 **pprog, u32 dst_reg, u8 src_reg, bool is64, u8 op)
>
> #define INSN_SZ_DIFF (((addrs[i] - addrs[i - 1]) - (prog - temp)))
>
> +/* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */
> +#define RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack) \
> + EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85, -round_up(stack, 8) - 8)
> +
> static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image, u8 *rw_image,
> int oldproglen, struct jit_context *ctx, bool jmp_padding)
> {
> @@ -1623,9 +1631,7 @@ st: if (is_imm8(insn->off))
>
> func = (u8 *) __bpf_call_base + imm32;
> if (tail_call_reachable) {
> - /* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */
> - EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85,
> - -round_up(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth, 8) - 8);
> + RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth);
> if (!imm32)
> return -EINVAL;
> offs = 7 + x86_call_depth_emit_accounting(&prog, func);
> @@ -2298,7 +2304,9 @@ static int invoke_bpf_mod_ret(const struct btf_func_model *m, u8 **pprog,
> * push rbp
> * mov rbp, rsp
> * sub rsp, 16 // space for skb and dev
> - * push rbx // temp regs to pass start time
> + * mov qword ptr [rbp - 40], rbx // temp regs to pass start time
> + * mov rax, 2 // cache number of argument to rax
What does it mean?
> + * mov qword ptr [rbp - 32], rax // save number of argument to stack
Here // is ok since it's inside /* */
> * mov qword ptr [rbp - 16], rdi // save skb pointer to stack
> * mov qword ptr [rbp - 8], rsi // save dev pointer to stack
> * call __bpf_prog_enter // rcu_read_lock and preempt_disable
> @@ -2323,7 +2331,9 @@ static int invoke_bpf_mod_ret(const struct btf_func_model *m, u8 **pprog,
> * push rbp
> * mov rbp, rsp
> * sub rsp, 24 // space for skb, dev, return value
> - * push rbx // temp regs to pass start time
> + * mov qword ptr [rbp - 40], rbx // temp regs to pass start time
> + * mov rax, 2 // cache number of argument to rax
> + * mov qword ptr [rbp - 32], rax // save number of argument to stack
> * mov qword ptr [rbp - 24], rdi // save skb pointer to stack
> * mov qword ptr [rbp - 16], rsi // save dev pointer to stack
> * call __bpf_prog_enter // rcu_read_lock and preempt_disable
> @@ -2400,6 +2410,7 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
> * [ ... ]
> * [ stack_arg2 ]
> * RBP - arg_stack_off [ stack_arg1 ]
> + * RSP [ tail_call_cnt ] BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX
> */
>
> /* room for return value of orig_call or fentry prog */
> @@ -2464,6 +2475,8 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
> else
> /* sub rsp, stack_size */
> EMIT4(0x48, 0x83, 0xEC, stack_size);
> + if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
> + EMIT1(0x50); /* push rax */
> /* mov QWORD PTR [rbp - rbx_off], rbx */
> emit_stx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, BPF_REG_6, -rbx_off);
>
> @@ -2516,9 +2529,15 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
> restore_regs(m, &prog, regs_off);
> save_args(m, &prog, arg_stack_off, true);
>
> + if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
> + /* Before calling the original function, restore the
> + * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
> + */
> + RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
> +
> if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_ORIG_STACK) {
> - emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
> - EMIT2(0xff, 0xd0); /* call *rax */
> + emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
> + EMIT2(0xff, 0xd3); /* call *rbx */ // FIXME: Confirm 0xd3?
please no FIXME like comments.
You have to be confident in the code you're submitting.
llvm-mc -triple=x86_64 -show-encoding -x86-asm-syntax=intel
-output-asm-variant=1 <<< 'call rbx'
> } else {
> /* call original function */
> if (emit_rsb_call(&prog, orig_call, prog)) {
> @@ -2569,7 +2588,12 @@ int arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *image, void *i
> ret = -EINVAL;
> goto cleanup;
> }
> - }
> + } else if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
> + /* Before running the original function, restore the
> + * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
> + */
> + RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
> +
> /* restore return value of orig_call or fentry prog back into RAX */
> if (save_ret)
> emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_FP, -8);
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index cfabbcf47bdb8..c8df257ea435d 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -1028,6 +1028,11 @@ struct btf_func_model {
> */
> #define BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY BIT(6)
>
> +/* Indicate that current trampoline is in a tail call context. Then, it has to
> + * cache and restore tail_call_cnt to avoid infinite tail call loop.
> + */
> +#define BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX BIT(7)
> +
> /* Each call __bpf_prog_enter + call bpf_func + call __bpf_prog_exit is ~50
> * bytes on x86.
> */
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> index 78acf28d48732..16ab5da7161f2 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> @@ -415,8 +415,8 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
> goto out;
> }
>
> - /* clear all bits except SHARE_IPMODIFY */
> - tr->flags &= BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY;
> + /* clear all bits except SHARE_IPMODIFY and TAIL_CALL_CTX */
> + tr->flags &= (BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY | BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX);
>
> if (tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_FEXIT].nr_links ||
> tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_MODIFY_RETURN].nr_links) {
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index 4ccca1f6c9981..52ba9b043f16e 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -19246,6 +19246,21 @@ static int check_non_sleepable_error_inject(u32 btf_id)
> return btf_id_set_contains(&btf_non_sleepable_error_inject, btf_id);
> }
>
> +static inline int find_subprog_index(const struct bpf_prog *prog,
> + u32 btf_id)
> +{
> + struct bpf_prog_aux *aux = prog->aux;
> + int i, subprog = -1;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i < aux->func_info_cnt; i++)
> + if (aux->func_info[i].type_id == btf_id) {
> + subprog = i;
> + break;
> + }
> +
> + return subprog;
> +}
> +
> int bpf_check_attach_target(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
> const struct bpf_prog *prog,
> const struct bpf_prog *tgt_prog,
> @@ -19254,9 +19269,9 @@ int bpf_check_attach_target(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
> {
> bool prog_extension = prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_EXT;
> const char prefix[] = "btf_trace_";
> - int ret = 0, subprog = -1, i;
> const struct btf_type *t;
> bool conservative = true;
> + int ret = 0, subprog;
> const char *tname;
> struct btf *btf;
> long addr = 0;
> @@ -19291,11 +19306,7 @@ int bpf_check_attach_target(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> - for (i = 0; i < aux->func_info_cnt; i++)
> - if (aux->func_info[i].type_id == btf_id) {
> - subprog = i;
> - break;
> - }
> + subprog = find_subprog_index(tgt_prog, btf_id);
> if (subprog == -1) {
> bpf_log(log, "Subprog %s doesn't exist\n", tname);
> return -EINVAL;
> @@ -19559,7 +19570,7 @@ static int check_attach_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> struct bpf_attach_target_info tgt_info = {};
> u32 btf_id = prog->aux->attach_btf_id;
> struct bpf_trampoline *tr;
> - int ret;
> + int ret, subprog;
> u64 key;
>
> if (prog->type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_SYSCALL) {
> @@ -19629,6 +19640,12 @@ static int check_attach_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> if (!tr)
> return -ENOMEM;
>
> + if (tgt_prog && tgt_prog->aux->tail_call_reachable) {
> + subprog = find_subprog_index(tgt_prog, btf_id);
> + tr->flags = subprog > 0 && tgt_prog->aux->func[subprog]->is_func ?
> + BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX : 0;
If prog has subprogs all of them will 'is_func', no?
What's the point of the search ?
Just tgt_prog->aux->tail_call_reachable and func_cnt > 0 would be enough?
