| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4ab2e551-e371-2e94-dce2-432be3c09061@huawei.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 15:51:51 +0800
From: tongtiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
To: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@...il.com>,
Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next,v2] riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables
On 2021/10/26 2:27, Björn Töpel wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Oct 2021 at 05:38, Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com> wrote:
>>
>> When a tracing BPF program attempts to read memory without using the
>> bpf_probe_read() helper, the verifier marks the load instruction with
>> the BPF_PROBE_MEM flag. Since the riscv JIT does not currently recognize
>> this flag it falls back to the interpreter.
>>
>> Add support for BPF_PROBE_MEM, by appending an exception table to the
>> BPF program. If the load instruction causes a data abort, the fixup
>> infrastructure finds the exception table and fixes up the fault, by
>> clearing the destination register and jumping over the faulting
>> instruction.
>>
>> A more generic solution would add a "handler" field to the table entry,
>> like on x86 and s390.
>>
>> The same issue in ARM64 is fixed in:
>> commit 800834285361 ("bpf, arm64: Add BPF exception tables")
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
>> Tested-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
>> ---
>> v2:
>> Modify according to Björn's comments, mainly removes redundant head files
>> extable.h and some code style issues.
>>
>
> Thanks Tong! I haven't got around to take it for a spin yet.
>
> However, some more minor nits, and some other comments.
Thanks Björn, Your comments are very useful.
>
>> arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 27 ++++-
>> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h | 1 +
>> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 185 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c | 18 +++-
>> 4 files changed, 185 insertions(+), 46 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c
>> index 2fc729422151..442695393131 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c
>> @@ -11,14 +11,31 @@
>> #include <linux/module.h>
>> #include <linux/uaccess.h>
>>
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
>> +static inline bool in_bpf_jit(struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_JIT))
>> + return false;
>
> The whole function is gated by the ifdef. No need for this check. Please remove!
ok, It should be removed here.
>
>> +
>> + return regs->epc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START && regs->epc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END;
>> +}
>> +
>> +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
>> {
>> const struct exception_table_entry *fixup;
>>
>> fixup = search_exception_tables(regs->epc);
>> - if (fixup) {
>> - regs->epc = fixup->fixup;
>> - return 1;
>> - }
>> - return 0;
>> + if (!fixup)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
>> + if (in_bpf_jit(regs))
>> + return rv_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs);
>> +#endif
>> +
>> + regs->epc = fixup->fixup;
>> + return 1;
>> }
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h
>> index 75c1e9996867..8f2e5670c1aa 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h
>> @@ -71,6 +71,7 @@ struct rv_jit_context {
>> int ninsns;
>> int epilogue_offset;
>> int *offset; /* BPF to RV */
>> + int nexentrys;
>
> Nit: Spelling: entries, not entrys.
typo.
>
>> unsigned long flags;
>> int stack_size;
>> };
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
>> index 3af4131c22c7..a1b9fe14ead3 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
>> @@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
>> *
>> */
>>
>> +#include <linux/bitfield.h>
>> #include <linux/bpf.h>
>> #include <linux/filter.h>
>> #include "bpf_jit.h"
>> @@ -27,6 +28,21 @@ static const int regmap[] = {
>> [BPF_REG_AX] = RV_REG_T0,
>> };
>>
>> +static const int pt_regmap[] = {
>> + [RV_REG_A5] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a5),
>
> Nit: Please place the A5 *under* A4.
ok, A5 should be placed under A4.
>
>> + [RV_REG_A0] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a0),
>> + [RV_REG_A1] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a1),
>> + [RV_REG_A2] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a2),
>> + [RV_REG_A3] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a3),
>> + [RV_REG_A4] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, a4),
>> + [RV_REG_S1] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, s1),
>> + [RV_REG_S2] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, s2),
>> + [RV_REG_S3] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, s3),
>> + [RV_REG_S4] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, s4),
>> + [RV_REG_S5] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, s5),
>> + [RV_REG_T0] = offsetof(struct pt_regs, t0),
>> +};
>> +
>> enum {
>> RV_CTX_F_SEEN_TAIL_CALL = 0,
>> RV_CTX_F_SEEN_CALL = RV_REG_RA,
>> @@ -440,6 +456,69 @@ static int emit_call(bool fixed, u64 addr, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> +#define BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK GENMASK(26, 0)
>> +#define BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK GENMASK(31, 27)
>> +
>> +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
>> + struct pt_regs *regs)
>> +{
>> + off_t offset = FIELD_GET(BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK, ex->fixup);
>> + int regs_offset = FIELD_GET(BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK, ex->fixup);
>> +
>> + *(unsigned long *)((unsigned char *)regs + pt_regmap[regs_offset]) = 0;
>
> Nit: Inconsistency. Sometimes you use (void *) cast for byte access,
> sometimes (unsigned char *). I'd change it to void * here, and keep
> the (void *) below.
Ummm, It is common to use void* for transit, such as container_of.
>
>> + regs->epc = (unsigned long)&ex->fixup - offset;
>> +
>> + return 1;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/* For accesses to BTF pointers, add an entry to the exception table */
>> +static int add_exception_handler(const struct bpf_insn *insn,
>> + struct rv_jit_context *ctx,
>> + int dst_reg, int insn_len)
>> +{
>> + struct exception_table_entry *ex;
>> + unsigned long pc;
>> + off_t offset;
>> +
>> + if (!ctx->insns || !ctx->prog->aux->extable || BPF_MODE(insn->code) != BPF_PROBE_MEM)
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(ctx->nexentrys >= ctx->prog->aux->num_exentries))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(insn_len > ctx->ninsns))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!rvc_enabled() && insn_len == 1))
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> +
>> + ex = &ctx->prog->aux->extable[ctx->nexentrys];
>> + pc = (unsigned long)&ctx->insns[ctx->ninsns - insn_len];
>> +
>> + offset = pc - (long)&ex->insn;
>> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(offset >= 0 || offset < INT_MIN))
>> + return -ERANGE;
>> + ex->insn = pc;
>> +
>> + /*
>> + * Since the extable follows the program, the fixup offset is always
>> + * negative and limited to BPF_JIT_REGION_SIZE. Store a positive value
>> + * to keep things simple, and put the destination register in the upper
>> + * bits. We don't need to worry about buildtime or runtime sort
>> + * modifying the upper bits because the table is already sorted, and
>> + * isn't part of the main exception table.
>> + */
>> + offset = (long)&ex->fixup - (pc + insn_len * sizeof(u16));
>> + if (!FIELD_FIT(BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK, offset))
>> + return -ERANGE;
>> +
>> + ex->fixup = FIELD_PREP(BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK, offset) |
>> + FIELD_PREP(BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK, dst_reg);
>> +
>> + ctx->nexentrys++;
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx,
>> bool extra_pass)
>> {
>> @@ -893,52 +972,86 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx,
>>
>> /* LDX: dst = *(size *)(src + off) */
>> case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_B:
>> - if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> - emit(rv_lbu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_B:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_H:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_W:
>> + case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_DW:
>> + {
>> + int insn_len, insns_start;
>> +
>> + switch (BPF_SIZE(code)) {
>> + case BPF_B:
>> + if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lbu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + break;
>> + }
>> +
>> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lbu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> + return 1;
>> break;
>> - }
>> + case BPF_H:
>> + if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lhu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + break;
>> + }
>>
>> - emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> - emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> - emit(rv_lbu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> - if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> - return 1;
>> - break;
>> - case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H:
>> - if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> - emit(rv_lhu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lhu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> + return 1;
>> break;
>> - }
>> + case BPF_W:
>> + if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lwu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + break;
>> + }
>>
>> - emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> - emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> - emit(rv_lhu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> - if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> - return 1;
>> - break;
>> - case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W:
>> - if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> - emit(rv_lwu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
>> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit(rv_lwu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> + return 1;
>> break;
>> - }
>> + case BPF_DW:
>> + if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit_ld(rd, off, rs, ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> + break;
>> + }
>>
>> - emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> - emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> - emit(rv_lwu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
>> - if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
>> - return 1;
>> - break;
>> - case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW:
>> - if (is_12b_int(off)) {
>> - emit_ld(rd, off, rs, ctx);
>> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> + insns_start = ctx->ninsns;
>> + emit_ld(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1, ctx);
>> + insn_len = ctx->ninsns - insns_start;
>> break;
>> }
>>
>> - emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
>> - emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs, ctx);
>> - emit_ld(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1, ctx);
>> + ret = add_exception_handler(insn, ctx, rd, insn_len);
>> + if (ret)
>> + return ret;
>> break;
>> -
>> + }
>> /* speculation barrier */
>> case BPF_ST | BPF_NOSPEC:
>> break;
>> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c
>> index fed86f42dfbe..5f2a842ec6f3 100644
>> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c
>> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c
>> @@ -41,12 +41,12 @@ bool bpf_jit_needs_zext(void)
>>
>> struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
>> {
>> + unsigned int image_size, prog_size, extable_size;
>> bool tmp_blinded = false, extra_pass = false;
>> struct bpf_prog *tmp, *orig_prog = prog;
>> int pass = 0, prev_ninsns = 0, i;
>> struct rv_jit_data *jit_data;
>> struct rv_jit_context *ctx;
>> - unsigned int image_size = 0;
>
> Hmm, image_size is now the *program size* plus the extable. So,
> prog_size is what image_size was. If my memory is not failing I
> *think* that the image_size has to be initialized to zero , if so this
> new prog_size has to be initialized to zero. I might be wrong. I just
> want to make sure that we're not introducing uninitialized data
> access.
>
> Same question for the extable_size. I see it's being used outside the
> for-loop below.
>
> To me it looks like both prog_size and extable_size needs to be
> initialized to zero.
I checked the logic. indeed, prog_size and extable_size needs to be initialized to 0.
>
>>
>> if (!prog->jit_requested)
>> return orig_prog;
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>
>> if (ctx->offset) {
>> extra_pass = true;
>> - image_size = sizeof(*ctx->insns) * ctx->ninsns;
>> + prog_size = sizeof(*ctx->insns) * ctx->ninsns;
>> goto skip_init_ctx;
>> }
>>
>> @@ -102,8 +102,12 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
>> if (ctx->ninsns == prev_ninsns) {
>> if (jit_data->header)
>> break;
>> + /* obtain the actual image size */
>> + extable_size = prog->aux->num_exentries *
>> + sizeof(struct exception_table_entry);
>> + prog_size = sizeof(*ctx->insns) * ctx->ninsns;
>> + image_size = prog_size + extable_size;
>
> image_size is only used in the call to bpf_jit_binary_alloc(). I'd
> remove it and only use prog_size + extable_size in the call. Or move
> it into the if-statement.
>
ok, remove image_size to simplified code.
>>
>> - image_size = sizeof(*ctx->insns) * ctx->ninsns;
>> jit_data->header =
>> bpf_jit_binary_alloc(image_size,
>> &jit_data->image,
>> @@ -130,9 +134,13 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
>> goto out_offset;
>> }
>>
>> + if (extable_size)
>> + prog->aux->extable = (void *)ctx->insns + prog_size;
>
> (This was the void*-cast I was talking about)
>
>
>> skip_init_ctx:
>> pass++;
>> ctx->ninsns = 0;
>> + ctx->nexentrys = 0;
>>
>> bpf_jit_build_prologue(ctx);
>> if (build_body(ctx, extra_pass, NULL)) {
>> @@ -143,11 +151,11 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
>> bpf_jit_build_epilogue(ctx);
>>
>> if (bpf_jit_enable > 1)
>> - bpf_jit_dump(prog->len, image_size, pass, ctx->insns);
>> + bpf_jit_dump(prog->len, prog_size, pass, ctx->insns);
>>
>> prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx->insns;
>> prog->jited = 1;
>> - prog->jited_len = image_size;
>> + prog->jited_len = prog_size;
>>
>> bpf_flush_icache(jit_data->header, ctx->insns + ctx->ninsns);
>>
>> --
>> 2.25.1
>
>
>
> Again, thank you for hacking on this!
thanks.
>
>
> Cheers,
> Björn
> .
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists