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  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]
Date:   Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:28:43 -0800
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: support module BTF for
 BPF_TYPE_ID_TARGET CO-RE relocation

On Sat, Dec 5, 2020 at 4:38 PM Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 4 Dec 2020, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>
> > When Clang emits ldimm64 instruction for BPF_TYPE_ID_TARGET CO-RE relocation,
> > put module BTF FD, containing target type, into upper 32 bits of imm64.
> >
> > Because this FD is internal to libbpf, it's very cumbersome to test this in
> > selftests. Manual testing was performed with debug log messages sprinkled
> > across selftests and libbpf, confirming expected values are substituted.
> > Better testing will be performed as part of the work adding module BTF types
> > support to  bpf_snprintf_btf() helpers.
> >
> > Cc: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>
>
> Thanks so much for doing this Andrii! When I tested, I ran into a problem;
> it turns out when a module struct such as "veth_stats" is used, it's
> classified as BTF_KIND_FWD, and as a result when we iterate over
> the modules and look in the veth module, "struct veth_stats" does not
> match since its module kind (BTF_KIND_STRUCT) does not match the candidate
> kind (BTF_KIND_FWD). I'm kind of out of my depth here, but the below
> patch (on top of your patch) worked.

I'm not quite clear on the situation. BTF_KIND_FWD is for the local
type or the remote type? Maybe a small example would help, before we
go straight to assuming FWD can be always resolved into a concrete
STRUCT/UNION.


>  However without it - when we find
> 0  candidate matches - as well as not substituting the module object
> id/type id - we hit a segfault:

Yep, I missed the null check in:

targ_spec->btf != prog->obj->btf_vmlinux

I'll fix that.

>
> Program terminated with signal 11, Segmentation fault.
> #0  0x0000000000480bf9 in bpf_core_calc_relo (prog=0x4d6ba40,
> relo=0x4d70e7c,
>     relo_idx=0, local_spec=0x7ffe2cf17b00, targ_spec=0x0,
> res=0x7ffe2cf17ae0)
>     at libbpf.c:4408
> 4408            switch (kind) {
> Missing separate debuginfos, use: debuginfo-install
> elfutils-libelf-0.172-2.el7.x86_64 glibc-2.17-196.el7.x86_64
> libattr-2.4.46-13.el7.x86_64 libcap-2.22-9.el7.x86_64
> libgcc-4.8.5-36.0.1.el7_6.2.x86_64 zlib-1.2.7-18.el7.x86_64
> (gdb) bt
> #0  0x0000000000480bf9 in bpf_core_calc_relo (prog=0x4d6ba40,
> relo=0x4d70e7c,
>     relo_idx=0, local_spec=0x7ffe2cf17b00, targ_spec=0x0,
> res=0x7ffe2cf17ae0)
>     at libbpf.c:4408
>
>
> The dereferences of targ_spec in bpf_core_recalc_relo() seem
> to be the cause; that function is called with a NULL targ_spec
> when 0 candidates are found, so it's possible we'd need to
> guard those accesses for cases where a bogus type was passed
> in and no candidates were found.  If the below looks good would
> it make sense to roll it into your patch or will I add it to my
> v3 patch series?
>
> Thanks again for your help with this!
>
> Alan
>
> From 08040730dbff6c5d7636927777ac85a71c10827f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
> Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 01:10:28 +0100
> Subject: [PATCH] libbpf: handle fwd kinds when checking candidate relocations
>  for modules
>
> when a struct belonging to a module is being assessed, it will be
> designated a fwd kind (BTF_KIND_FWD); when matching candidate
> types constraints on exact type matching need to be relaxed to
> ensure that such structures are found successfully.  Introduce
> kinds_match() function to handle this comparison.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>

[...]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists