linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/2] bpf: separate bpf_get

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZTYVq=oct0rUg5Y+wOc07k2Pcz-66M-NtjRFJTez0AvA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Jul 2020 22:55:16 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc:     open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
        john fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Peter Ziljstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/2] bpf: separate bpf_get_[stack|stackid] for
 perf events BPF

On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:08 PM Song Liu <songliubraving@...com> wrote:
>
> Calling get_perf_callchain() on perf_events from PEBS entries may cause
> unwinder errors. To fix this issue, the callchain is fetched early. Such
> perf_events are marked with __PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN_EARLY.
>
> Similarly, calling bpf_get_[stack|stackid] on perf_events from PEBS may
> also cause unwinder errors. To fix this, add separate version of these
> two helpers, bpf_get_[stack|stackid]_pe. These two hepers use callchain in
> bpf_perf_event_data_kern->data->callchain.
>
> Signed-off-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
> ---
>  include/linux/bpf.h      |   2 +
>  kernel/bpf/stackmap.c    | 204 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
>  kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c |   4 +-
>  3 files changed, 190 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>

Glad this approach worked out! Few minor bugs below, though.

[...]

> +       if (unlikely(flags & ~(BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK | BPF_F_USER_STACK |
> +                              BPF_F_FAST_STACK_CMP | BPF_F_REUSE_STACKID)))
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       user = flags & BPF_F_USER_STACK;
> +       kernel = !user;
> +
> +       has_kernel = !event->attr.exclude_callchain_kernel;
> +       has_user = !event->attr.exclude_callchain_user;
> +
> +       if ((kernel && !has_kernel) || (user && !has_user))
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       trace = ctx->data->callchain;
> +       if (!trace || (!has_kernel && !has_user))

(!has_kernel && !has_user) can never happen, it's checked by if above
(one of kernel or user is always true => one of has_user or has_kernel
is always true).

> +               return -EFAULT;
> +
> +       if (has_kernel && has_user) {
> +               __u64 nr_kernel = count_kernel_ip(trace);
> +               int ret;
> +
> +               if (kernel) {
> +                       __u64 nr = trace->nr;
> +
> +                       trace->nr = nr_kernel;
> +                       ret = __bpf_get_stackid(map, trace, flags);
> +
> +                       /* restore nr */
> +                       trace->nr = nr;
> +               } else { /* user */
> +                       u64 skip = flags & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK;
> +
> +                       skip += nr_kernel;
> +                       if (skip > ~BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK)

something fishy here: ~BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK is a really big number,
were you going to check that skip is not bigger than 255 (i.e., fits
within BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK)?

> +                               return -EFAULT;
> +
> +                       flags = (flags & ~BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK) |
> +                               (skip  & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK);
> +                       ret = __bpf_get_stackid(map, trace, flags);
> +               }
> +               return ret;
> +       }
> +       return __bpf_get_stackid(map, trace, flags);
> +}
> +

[...]

> +
> +       has_kernel = !event->attr.exclude_callchain_kernel;
> +       has_user = !event->attr.exclude_callchain_user;
> +
> +       if ((kernel && !has_kernel) || (user && !has_user))
> +               goto clear;
> +
> +       err = -EFAULT;
> +       trace = ctx->data->callchain;
> +       if (!trace || (!has_kernel && !has_user))
> +               goto clear;

same as above for bpf_get_stackid, probably can be simplified

> +
> +       if (has_kernel && has_user) {
> +               __u64 nr_kernel = count_kernel_ip(trace);
> +               int ret;
> +
> +               if (kernel) {
> +                       __u64 nr = trace->nr;
> +
> +                       trace->nr = nr_kernel;
> +                       ret = __bpf_get_stack(ctx->regs, NULL, trace, buf,
> +                                             size, flags);
> +
> +                       /* restore nr */
> +                       trace->nr = nr;
> +               } else { /* user */
> +                       u64 skip = flags & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK;
> +
> +                       skip += nr_kernel;
> +                       if (skip > ~BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK)
> +                               goto clear;
> +

and here

> +                       flags = (flags & ~BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK) |
> +                               (skip  & BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK);

actually if you check that skip <= BPF_F_SKIP_FIELD_MASK, you don't
need to mask it here, just `| skip`

> +                       ret = __bpf_get_stack(ctx->regs, NULL, trace, buf,
> +                                             size, flags);
> +               }
> +               return ret;
> +       }
> +       return __bpf_get_stack(ctx->regs, NULL, trace, buf, size, flags);
> +clear:
> +       memset(buf, 0, size);
> +       return err;
> +
> +}
> +

[...]