linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/7] bpf: Implement bpf_probe_read_kernel

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: <CAEf4BzYLPVqRzwzziugfV+fXbd6KQnkvsXJWOYDEgQ6rgUSH9A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 15:09:30 -0800
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@...il.com>, Jordan Rome <linux@...danrome.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Levi Zim <rsworktech@...look.com>, 
	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@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, 
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Matt Bobrowski <mattbobrowski@...gle.com>, 
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, 
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>, Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>, 
	Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	linux-trace-kernel <linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/7] bpf: Implement bpf_probe_read_kernel_dynptr
 helper

On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 2:54 PM Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2025 at 5:04 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 5:05 PM Levi Zim <rsworktech@...look.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 2025/1/26 00:58, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > >  > On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 12:30 AM Levi Zim via B4 Relay
> > >  > <devnull+rsworktech.outlook.com@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >  >> From: Levi Zim <rsworktech@...look.com>
> > >  >>
> > >  >> This patch add a helper function bpf_probe_read_kernel_dynptr:
> > >  >>
> > >  >> long bpf_probe_read_kernel_dynptr(const struct bpf_dynptr *dst,
> > >  >>          u32 offset, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr, u64 flags);
> > >  > We stopped adding helpers years ago.
> > >  > Only new kfuncs are allowed.
> > >
> > > Sorry, I didn't know that. Just asking, is there any
> > > documentation/discussion
> > > about stopping adding helpers?
> > >
> > > I will switch the implementation to kfuncs in v3.
> > >
> > >  > This particular one doesn't look useful as-is.
> > >  > The same logic can be expressed with
> > >  > - create dynptr
> > >  > - dynptr_slice
> > >  > - copy_from_kernel
> > >
> > > By copy_from_kernel I assume you mean bpf_probe_read_kernel. The problem
> > > with dynptr_slice_rdwr and probe_read_kernel is that they only support a
> > > compile-time constant size [1].
> > >
> > > But in order to best utilize the space on a BPF ringbuf, it is possible
> > > to reserve a
> > > variable length of space as dynptr on a ringbuf with
> > > bpf_ringbuf_reserve_dynptr.
>
> For our uprobes, we've run into similar issues around doing variable-sized
> bpf_probe_read_user() into ring buffers for our debugger [1]. Our use case
> is that we generate uprobes that recursively read data structures until we
> fill up a buffer. The verifier's insistence on knowing statically that a read
> fits into the buffer makes for awkward code, and makes it hard to pack the
> buffer fully; we have to split our reads into a couple of static size classes.
>
> Any chance there'd be interest in taking the opportunity to support
> dynamically-sized reads from userspace too? :)

That's bpf_probe_read_user_dynptr() from patch #2, no?

But generally speaking, here's a list of new APIs that we'd need to
cover all existing fixed buffer versions:

- non-sleepable probe reads:

  bpf_probe_read_kernel_dynptr()
  bpf_probe_read_user_dynptr()
  bpf_probe_read_kernel_str_dynptr()
  bpf_probe_read_user_str_dynptr()

- sleepable probe reads (copy_from_user):

bpf_copy_from_user_dynptr()
bpf_copy_from_user_str_dynptr()

- and then we have complementary task-based APIs for non-current process:

bpf_probe_read_user_task_dynptr()
bpf_probe_read_user_str_task_dynptr()
bpf_copy_from_user_task_dynptr()
bpf_copy_from_user_str_task_dynptr()

Jordan is working on non-dynptr version of
bpf_copy_from_user_str_task(), once he's done with that, we'll add
dynptr version, probably.

>
> [1] https://side-eye.io
>
> >
> > That makes sense. The commit log didn't call it out.
> > Please spell out the motivation clearly.
> > Also why bpf_probe_read_kernel_common ?
> > Do we need to memset() it on failure?
> >