netdev - Re: [PATCH] MIPS: BPF: Restore MIPS32 cBPF JIT; disable MIPS32 eBPF JIT

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5deaa994.1c69fb81.97561.647e@mx.google.com>
Date:   Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:18:44 -0800
From:   Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>
To:     Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>
CC:     linux-mips@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] MIPS: BPF: Restore MIPS32 cBPF JIT; disable MIPS32 eBPF JIT

Hello,

Paul Burton wrote:
> Commit 716850ab104d ("MIPS: eBPF: Initial eBPF support for MIPS32
> architecture.") enabled our eBPF JIT for MIPS32 kernels, whereas it has
> previously only been availailable for MIPS64. It was my understanding at
> the time that the BPF test suite was passing & JITing a comparable
> number of tests to our cBPF JIT [1], but it turns out that was not the
> case.
> 
> The eBPF JIT has a number of problems on MIPS32:
> 
> - Most notably various code paths still result in emission of MIPS64
>   instructions which will cause reserved instruction exceptions & kernel
>   panics when run on MIPS32 CPUs.
> 
> - The eBPF JIT doesn't account for differences between the O32 ABI used
>   by MIPS32 kernels versus the N64 ABI used by MIPS64 kernels. Notably
>   arguments beyond the first 4 are passed on the stack in O32, and this
>   is entirely unhandled when JITing a BPF_CALL instruction. Stack space
>   must be reserved for arguments even if they all fit in registers, and
>   the callee is free to assume that stack space has been reserved for
>   its use - with the eBPF JIT this is not the case, so calling any
>   function can result in clobbering values on the stack & unpredictable
>   behaviour. Function arguments in eBPF are always 64-bit values which
>   is also entirely unhandled - the JIT still uses a single (32-bit)
>   register per argument. As a result all function arguments are always
>   passed incorrectly when JITing a BPF_CALL instruction, leading to
>   kernel crashes or strange behavior.
> 
> - The JIT attempts to bail our on use of ALU64 instructions or 64-bit
>   memory access instructions. The code doing this at the start of
>   build_one_insn() incorrectly checks whether BPF_OP() equals BPF_DW,
>   when it should really be checking BPF_SIZE() & only doing so when
>   BPF_CLASS() is one of BPF_{LD,LDX,ST,STX}. This results in false
>   positives that cause more bailouts than intended, and that in turns
>   hides some of the problems described above.
> 
> - The kernel's cBPF->eBPF translation makes heavy use of 64-bit eBPF
>   instructions that the MIPS32 eBPF JIT bails out on, leading to most
>   cBPF programs not being JITed at all.
> 
> Until these problems are resolved, revert the removal of the cBPF JIT &
> the enabling of the eBPF JIT on MIPS32 done by commit 716850ab104d
> ("MIPS: eBPF: Initial eBPF support for MIPS32 architecture.").
> 
> Note that this does not undo the changes made to the eBPF JIT by that
> commit, since they are a useful starting point to providing MIPS32
> support - they're just not nearly complete.
> 
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-mips/MWHPR2201MB13583388481F01A422CE7D66D4410@MWHPR2201MB1358.namprd22.prod.outlook.com/

Applied to mips-fixes.

> commit c409cd05ab7f
> https://git.kernel.org/mips/c/c409cd05ab7f
> 
> Signed-off-by: Paul Burton <paulburton@...nel.org>
> Fixes: 716850ab104d ("MIPS: eBPF: Initial eBPF support for MIPS32 architecture.")

Thanks,
    Paul

[ This message was auto-generated; if you believe anything is incorrect
  then please email paulburton@...nel.org to report it. ]