| 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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 8 May 2024 22:32:26 +0530
From: Naveen N Rao <naveen@...nel.org>
To: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@...il.com>, Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@...roup.eu>,
"Aneesh Kumar K.V" <aneesh.kumar@...nel.org>, Hari Bathini <hbathini@...ux.ibm.com>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...nel.org,
puranjay12@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2] powerpc/bpf: enforce full ordering for ATOMIC
operations with BPF_FETCH
On Wed, May 08, 2024 at 11:54:04AM GMT, Puranjay Mohan wrote:
> The Linux Kernel Memory Model [1][2] requires RMW operations that have a
> return value to be fully ordered.
>
> BPF atomic operations with BPF_FETCH (including BPF_XCHG and
> BPF_CMPXCHG) return a value back so they need to be JITed to fully
> ordered operations. POWERPC currently emits relaxed operations for
> these.
>
> We can show this by running the following litmus-test:
>
> PPC SB+atomic_add+fetch
>
> {
> 0:r0=x; (* dst reg assuming offset is 0 *)
> 0:r1=2; (* src reg *)
> 0:r2=1;
> 0:r4=y; (* P0 writes to this, P1 reads this *)
> 0:r5=z; (* P1 writes to this, P0 reads this *)
> 0:r6=0;
>
> 1:r2=1;
> 1:r4=y;
> 1:r5=z;
> }
>
> P0 | P1 ;
> stw r2, 0(r4) | stw r2,0(r5) ;
> | ;
> loop:lwarx r3, r6, r0 | ;
> mr r8, r3 | ;
> add r3, r3, r1 | sync ;
> stwcx. r3, r6, r0 | ;
> bne loop | ;
> mr r1, r8 | ;
> | ;
> lwa r7, 0(r5) | lwa r7,0(r4) ;
>
> ~exists(0:r7=0 /\ 1:r7=0)
>
> Witnesses
> Positive: 9 Negative: 3
> Condition ~exists (0:r7=0 /\ 1:r7=0)
> Observation SB+atomic_add+fetch Sometimes 3 9
>
> This test shows that the older store in P0 is reordered with a newer
> load to a different address. Although there is a RMW operation with
> fetch between them. Adding a sync before and after RMW fixes the issue:
>
> Witnesses
> Positive: 9 Negative: 0
> Condition ~exists (0:r7=0 /\ 1:r7=0)
> Observation SB+atomic_add+fetch Never 0 9
>
> [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/memory-barriers.txt
> [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/atomic_t.txt
>
> Fixes: 65112709115f ("powerpc/bpf/64: add support for BPF_ATOMIC bitwise operations")
> Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@...nel.org>
Thanks for reporting and fixing this.
There are actually four commits that this fixes across ppc32/ppc64:
Fixes: aea7ef8a82c0 ("powerpc/bpf/32: add support for BPF_ATOMIC bitwise operations")
Fixes: 2d9206b22743 ("powerpc/bpf/32: Add instructions for atomic_[cmp]xchg")
Fixes: dbe6e2456fb0 ("powerpc/bpf/64: add support for atomic fetch operations")
Fixes: 1e82dfaa7819 ("powerpc/bpf/64: Add instructions for atomic_[cmp]xchg")
> ---
> Changes in v1 -> v2:
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20240507175439.119467-1-puranjay@kernel.org/
> - Don't emit `sync` for non-SMP kernels as that adds unessential overhead.
> ---
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c
> index 2f39c50ca729..0318b83f2e6a 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c
> @@ -853,6 +853,15 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, u32 *fimage, struct code
> /* Get offset into TMP_REG */
> EMIT(PPC_RAW_LI(tmp_reg, off));
> tmp_idx = ctx->idx * 4;
> + /*
> + * Enforce full ordering for operations with BPF_FETCH by emitting a 'sync'
> + * before and after the operation.
> + *
> + * This is a requirement in the Linux Kernel Memory Model.
> + * See __cmpxchg_u64() in asm/cmpxchg.h as an example.
^^^
Nit... u32
> + */
> + if (imm & BPF_FETCH && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> + EMIT(PPC_RAW_SYNC());
I think this block should go before the previous two instructions. We
use tmp_idx as a label to retry the ll/sc sequence, so we will end up
executing the 'sync' operation on a retry here.
> /* load value from memory into r0 */
> EMIT(PPC_RAW_LWARX(_R0, tmp_reg, dst_reg, 0));
>
> @@ -905,6 +914,9 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, u32 *fimage, struct code
>
> /* For the BPF_FETCH variant, get old data into src_reg */
> if (imm & BPF_FETCH) {
> + /* Emit 'sync' to enforce full ordering */
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> + EMIT(PPC_RAW_SYNC());
> EMIT(PPC_RAW_MR(ret_reg, ax_reg));
> if (!fp->aux->verifier_zext)
> EMIT(PPC_RAW_LI(ret_reg - 1, 0)); /* higher 32-bit */
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> index 79f23974a320..9a077f8acf7b 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
> @@ -804,6 +804,15 @@ int bpf_jit_build_body(struct bpf_prog *fp, u32 *image, u32 *fimage, struct code
> /* Get offset into TMP_REG_1 */
> EMIT(PPC_RAW_LI(tmp1_reg, off));
> tmp_idx = ctx->idx * 4;
> + /*
> + * Enforce full ordering for operations with BPF_FETCH by emitting a 'sync'
> + * before and after the operation.
> + *
> + * This is a requirement in the Linux Kernel Memory Model.
> + * See __cmpxchg_u64() in asm/cmpxchg.h as an example.
> + */
> + if (imm & BPF_FETCH && IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_SMP))
> + EMIT(PPC_RAW_SYNC());
Same here.
I'll try and give this a test tomorrow.
- Naveen
Powered by blists - more mailing lists