| 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: Fri, 12 Apr 2019 22:59:41 +0100
From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
To: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
oss-drivers@...ronome.com, Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
Subject: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 08/19] bpf: insert explicit zero extension insn when hardware doesn't do it implicitly
After previous patches, verifier has marked those instructions that really
need zero extension on dst_reg.
It is then for all back-ends to decide how to use such information to
eliminate unnecessary zero extension code-gen during JIT compilation.
One approach is:
1. Verifier insert explicit zero extension for those instructions that
need zero extension.
2. All JIT back-ends do NOT generate zero extension for sub-register
write any more.
The good thing for this approach is no major change on JIT back-end
interface, all back-ends could get this optimization.
However, only those back-ends that do not have hardware zero extension
want this optimization. For back-ends like x86_64 and AArch64, there is
hardware support, so zext insertion should be disabled.
This patch introduces new target hook "bpf_jit_hardware_zext" which is
default true, meaning the underlying hardware will do zero extension
implicitly, therefore zext insertion by verifier will be disabled. Once a
back-end overrides this hook to false, then verifier will insert zext
sequence to clear high 32-bit of definitions when necessary.
Offload targets do not use this native target hook, instead, they could
get the optimization results using bpf_prog_offload_ops.finalize.
Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
---
include/linux/bpf.h | 1 +
include/linux/filter.h | 1 +
kernel/bpf/core.c | 8 +++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 87 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
4 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 884b8e1..bdab6e7 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -368,6 +368,7 @@ struct bpf_prog_aux {
u32 id;
u32 func_cnt; /* used by non-func prog as the number of func progs */
u32 func_idx; /* 0 for non-func prog, the index in func array for func prog */
+ bool no_verifier_zext; /* No zero extension insertion by verifier. */
bool offload_requested;
struct bpf_prog **func;
void *jit_data; /* JIT specific data. arch dependent */
diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
index fb0edad..8750657 100644
--- a/include/linux/filter.h
+++ b/include/linux/filter.h
@@ -821,6 +821,7 @@ u64 __bpf_call_base(u64 r1, u64 r2, u64 r3, u64 r4, u64 r5);
struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog);
void bpf_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog);
+bool bpf_jit_hardware_zext(void);
bool bpf_helper_changes_pkt_data(void *func);
static inline bool bpf_dump_raw_ok(void)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 2792eda..1c54274 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -2091,6 +2091,14 @@ bool __weak bpf_helper_changes_pkt_data(void *func)
return false;
}
+/* Return TRUE is the target hardware of JIT will do zero extension to high bits
+ * when writing to low 32-bit of one register. Otherwise, return FALSE.
+ */
+bool __weak bpf_jit_hardware_zext(void)
+{
+ return true;
+}
+
/* To execute LD_ABS/LD_IND instructions __bpf_prog_run() may call
* skb_copy_bits(), so provide a weak definition of it for NET-less config.
*/
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 83b3f83..016f81d 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7551,6 +7551,80 @@ static int opt_remove_nops(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
return 0;
}
+static int opt_subreg_zext_lo32(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+{
+ struct bpf_insn_aux_data orig_aux, *aux = env->insn_aux_data;
+ struct bpf_insn *insns = env->prog->insnsi;
+ int i, delta = 0, len = env->prog->len;
+ struct bpf_insn zext_patch[3];
+ struct bpf_prog *new_prog;
+
+ zext_patch[1] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_LSH, 0, 32);
+ zext_patch[2] = BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, 0, 32);
+ for (i = 0; i < len; i++) {
+ int adj_idx = i + delta;
+ struct bpf_insn insn;
+
+ if (!aux[adj_idx].zext_dst)
+ continue;
+
+ insn = insns[adj_idx];
+ /* "adjust_insn_aux_data" only retains the original insn aux
+ * data if insn at patched offset is at the end of the patch
+ * buffer. That is to say, given the following insn sequence:
+ *
+ * insn 1
+ * insn 2
+ * insn 3
+ *
+ * if the patch offset is at insn 2, then the patch buffer must
+ * be the following that original insn aux data can be retained.
+ *
+ * {lshift, rshift, insn2}
+ *
+ * However, zero extension needs to be inserted after insn2, so
+ * insn patch buffer needs to be the following:
+ *
+ * {insn2, lshift, rshift}
+ *
+ * which would cause insn aux data of insn2 lost and that data
+ * is critical for ctx field load instruction transformed
+ * correctly later inside "convert_ctx_accesses".
+ *
+ * The simplest way to fix this to build the following patch
+ * buffer:
+ *
+ * {lshift, rshift, insn-next-to-insn2}
+ *
+ * Given insn2 defines a value, it can't be a JMP, hence there
+ * must be a next insn for it otherwise CFG check should have
+ * rejected this program. However, insn-next-to-insn2 could
+ * be a JMP and verifier insn patch infrastructure doesn't
+ * support adjust offset for JMP inside patch buffer. We would
+ * end up with a few insn check and offset adj code outside of
+ * the generic insn patch helpers if we go with this approach.
+ *
+ * Therefore, we still use {insn2, lshift, rshift} as the patch
+ * buffer, we copy and restore insn aux data for insn2
+ * explicitly. The change looks simpler and smaller.
+ */
+ zext_patch[0] = insns[adj_idx];
+ zext_patch[1].dst_reg = insn.dst_reg;
+ zext_patch[2].dst_reg = insn.dst_reg;
+ memcpy(&orig_aux, &aux[adj_idx], sizeof(orig_aux));
+ new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, adj_idx, zext_patch, 3);
+ if (!new_prog)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ env->prog = new_prog;
+ insns = new_prog->insnsi;
+ aux = env->insn_aux_data;
+ memcpy(&aux[adj_idx], &orig_aux, sizeof(orig_aux));
+ delta += 2;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
/* convert load instructions that access fields of a context type into a
* sequence of instructions that access fields of the underlying structure:
* struct __sk_buff -> struct sk_buff
@@ -8382,7 +8456,18 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr,
if (ret == 0)
ret = check_max_stack_depth(env);
- /* instruction rewrites happen after this point */
+ /* Instruction rewrites happen after this point.
+ * For offload target, finalize hook has all aux insn info, do any
+ * customized work there.
+ */
+ if (ret == 0 && !bpf_jit_hardware_zext() &&
+ !bpf_prog_is_dev_bound(env->prog->aux)) {
+ ret = opt_subreg_zext_lo32(env);
+ env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext = !!ret;
+ } else {
+ env->prog->aux->no_verifier_zext = true;
+ }
+
if (is_priv) {
if (ret == 0)
opt_hard_wire_dead_code_branches(env);
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists