| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20210107021701.1797-4-glin@suse.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2021 10:17:01 +0800
From: Gary Lin <glin@...e.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>,
andreas.taschner@...e.com
Subject: [PATCH RESEND v2 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for x64 jit jump padding
There are two tests added into verifier's jit tests to trigger x64
jit jump padding. The first test can be represented as the following
assembly code:
1: bpf_call bpf_get_prandom_u32
2: if r0 == 0 goto pc+128
3: if r0 == 1 goto pc+128
...
129: if r0 == 127 goto pc+128
130: goto pc+128
131: goto pc+127
...
256: goto pc+1
257: goto pc+0
258: r0 = 1
259: ret
We first store a random number to r0 and add the corresponding
conditional jumps (2~129) to make verifier believe that those jump
instructions from 130 to 257 are reachable. When the program is sent to
x64 jit, it starts to optimize out the NOP jumps backwards from 257.
Since there are 128 such jumps, the program easily reaches 15 passes and
triggers jump padding.
Here is the x64 jit code of the first test:
0: 0f 1f 44 00 00 nop DWORD PTR [rax+rax*1+0x0]
5: 66 90 xchg ax,ax
7: 55 push rbp
8: 48 89 e5 mov rbp,rsp
b: e8 4c 90 75 e3 call 0xffffffffe375905c
10: 48 83 f8 01 cmp rax,0x1
14: 0f 84 fe 04 00 00 je 0x518
1a: 48 83 f8 02 cmp rax,0x2
1e: 0f 84 f9 04 00 00 je 0x51d
...
f6: 48 83 f8 18 cmp rax,0x18
fa: 0f 84 8b 04 00 00 je 0x58b
100: 48 83 f8 19 cmp rax,0x19
104: 0f 84 86 04 00 00 je 0x590
10a: 48 83 f8 1a cmp rax,0x1a
10e: 0f 84 81 04 00 00 je 0x595
...
500: 0f 84 83 01 00 00 je 0x689
506: 48 81 f8 80 00 00 00 cmp rax,0x80
50d: 0f 84 76 01 00 00 je 0x689
513: e9 71 01 00 00 jmp 0x689
518: e9 6c 01 00 00 jmp 0x689
...
5fe: e9 86 00 00 00 jmp 0x689
603: e9 81 00 00 00 jmp 0x689
608: 0f 1f 00 nop DWORD PTR [rax]
60b: eb 7c jmp 0x689
60d: eb 7a jmp 0x689
...
683: eb 04 jmp 0x689
685: eb 02 jmp 0x689
687: 66 90 xchg ax,ax
689: b8 01 00 00 00 mov eax,0x1
68e: c9 leave
68f: c3 ret
As expected, a 3 bytes NOPs is inserted at 608 due to the transition
from imm32 jmp to imm8 jmp. A 2 bytes NOPs is also inserted at 687 to
replace a NOP jump.
The second test is to invoke the first test as a subprog to test
bpf2bpf. Per the system log, there was one more jit happened with only
one pass and the same jit code was produced.
Signed-off-by: Gary Lin <glin@...e.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jit.c | 16 ++++++++
2 files changed, 59 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 9be395d9dc64..0671e88bc15d 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -296,6 +296,49 @@ static void bpf_fill_scale(struct bpf_test *self)
}
}
+static int bpf_fill_torturous_jumps_insn(struct bpf_insn *insn)
+{
+ unsigned int len = 259, hlen = 128;
+ int i;
+
+ insn[0] = BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32);
+ for (i = 1; i <= hlen; i++) {
+ insn[i] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, i, hlen);
+ insn[i + hlen] = BPF_JMP_A(hlen - i);
+ }
+ insn[len - 2] = BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1);
+ insn[len - 1] = BPF_EXIT_INSN();
+
+ return len;
+}
+
+static void bpf_fill_torturous_jumps(struct bpf_test *self)
+{
+ struct bpf_insn *insn = self->fill_insns;
+ int i = 0;
+
+ switch (self->retval) {
+ case 1:
+ self->prog_len = bpf_fill_torturous_jumps_insn(insn);
+ return;
+ case 2:
+ /* main */
+ insn[i++] = BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP|BPF_CALL, 0, 1, 0, 3);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_10, -32, 0);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 2);
+ insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN();
+
+ /* subprog */
+ i += bpf_fill_torturous_jumps_insn(insn + i);
+
+ self->prog_len = i;
+ return;
+ default:
+ self->prog_len = 0;
+ break;
+ }
+}
+
/* BPF_SK_LOOKUP contains 13 instructions, if you need to fix up maps */
#define BPF_SK_LOOKUP(func) \
/* struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {} */ \
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jit.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jit.c
index c33adf344fae..b7653a334497 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jit.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jit.c
@@ -105,3 +105,19 @@
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
},
+{
+ "jit: torturous jumps",
+ .insns = { },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_torturous_jumps,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .retval = 1,
+},
+{
+ "jit: torturous jumps in subprog",
+ .insns = { },
+ .fill_helper = bpf_fill_torturous_jumps,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .retval = 2,
+},
--
2.29.2
Powered by blists - more mailing lists