[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230814134147.70289-1-hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 21:41:45 +0800
From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@...il.com>
To: bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, x86@...nel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, hpa@...or.com, mykolal@...com,
shuah@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org,
hffilwlqm@...il.com, tangyeechou@...il.com,
kernel-patches-bot@...com, maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH bpf-next 0/2] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop bug
>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 FENTRY/FEXIT
trampolines.
How did I discover the bug?
>From commit 7f6e4312e15a5c37 ("bpf: Limit caller's stack depth 256 for
subprogs with tailcalls"), the total stack size limits to around 8KiB.
Then, I write some bpf progs to validate the stack consuming, that are
tailcalls running in bpf2bpf and FENTRY/FEXIT tracing on bpf2bpf[1].
At that time, accidently, I made a tailcall loop. And then the loop halted
my VM. Without the loop, the bpf progs would consume over 8KiB stack size.
But the _stack-overflow_ did not halt my VM.
With bpf_printk(), I confirmed that the tailcall count limit did not work
expectedly. Next, read the code and fix it.
Finally, unfortunately, I only fix it on x64 but other arches. As a
result, CI tests failed because this bug hasn't been fixed on s390x.
Some helps are requested.
[1]: https://github.com/Asphaltt/learn-by-example/tree/main/ebpf/tailcall-stackoverflow
Leon Hwang (2):
bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop bug
selftests/bpf: Add testcases for tailcall infinite loop bug fixing
arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 23 ++-
include/linux/bpf.h | 6 +
kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 5 +-
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 9 +-
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c | 194 +++++++++++++++++-
.../bpf/progs/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fentry.c | 18 ++
.../bpf/progs/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fexit.c | 18 ++
7 files changed, 264 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fentry.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fexit.c
base-commit: 9930e4af4b509bcf6f060b09b16884f26102d110
--
2.41.0
Powered by blists - more mailing lists