netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/3] bpf, x86: allow function arguments up to 12 for TRACING

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <38957384-2129-4440-5e82-37f8afcf23c3@meta.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2023 21:29:17 -0700
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...a.com>
To: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
Cc: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org,
        ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
        martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
        x86@...nel.org, imagedong@...cent.com, benbjiang@...cent.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/3] bpf, x86: allow function arguments up to
 12 for TRACING



On 6/8/23 7:12 PM, Menglong Dong wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 9, 2023 at 5:07 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@...a.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 6/7/23 5:59 AM, menglong8.dong@...il.com wrote:
>>> From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
>>>
>>> For now, the BPF program of type BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING can only be used
>>> on the kernel functions whose arguments count less than 6. This is not
>>> friendly at all, as too many functions have arguments count more than 6.
>>
>> Since you already have some statistics, maybe listed in the commit message.
>>
>>>
>>> Therefore, let's enhance it by increasing the function arguments count
>>> allowed in arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(), for now, only x86_64.
>>>
>>> For the case that we don't need to call origin function, which means
>>> without BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG, we need only copy the function arguments
>>> that stored in the frame of the caller to current frame. The arguments
>>> of arg6-argN are stored in "$rbp + 0x18", we need copy them to
>>> "$rbp - regs_off + (6 * 8)".
>>
>> Maybe I missed something, could you explain why it is '$rbp + 0x18'?
>>
>> In the current upstream code, we have
>>
>>           /* Generated trampoline stack layout:
>>            *
>>            * RBP + 8         [ return address  ]
>>            * RBP + 0         [ RBP             ]
>>            *
>>            * RBP - 8         [ return value    ]  BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG or
>>            *
>> BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET flags
>>            *
>>            *                 [ reg_argN        ]  always
>>            *                 [ ...             ]
>>            * RBP - regs_off  [ reg_arg1        ]  program's ctx pointer
>>            *
>>            * RBP - nregs_off [ regs count      ]  always
>>            *
>>            * RBP - ip_off    [ traced function ]  BPF_TRAMP_F_IP_ARG flag
>>            *
>>            * RBP - run_ctx_off [ bpf_tramp_run_ctx ]
>>            */
>>
>> Next on-stack argument will be RBP + 16, right?
>>
> 
> Sorry for the confusing, it seems there should be
> some comments here.
> 
> It's not the next on-stack argument, but the next next on-stack
> argument. The call chain is:
> 
> caller -> origin call -> trampoline
> 
> So, we have to skip the "RIP" in the stack frame of "origin call",
> which means RBP + 16 + 8. To be clear, there are only 8-byte
> in the stack frame of "origin call".

Thanks. It does make sense now. So we have
   caller -> origin call -> (5 nops changed to a call) -> trampoline
          8 bytes                                    8 bytes
and inside trampoline we have 8 bytes in stack with 'push rbp'.
Yes, it would be great there is an explanation in the code.

> 
> Thanks!
> Menglong Dong
> 
> 
>>>
>>> For the case with BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG, we need prepare the arguments
>>> in stack before call origin function, which means we need alloc extra
>>> "8 * (arg_count - 6)" memory in the top of the stack. Note, there should
>>> not be any data be pushed to the stack before call the origin function.
>>> Then, we have to store rbx with 'mov' instead of 'push'.
>>>
>>> We use EMIT3_off32() or EMIT4() for "lea" and "sub". The range of the
>>> imm in "lea" and "sub" is [-128, 127] if EMIT4() is used. Therefore,
>>> we use EMIT3_off32() instead if the imm out of the range.
>>>
>>> It works well for the FENTRY and FEXIT, I'm not sure if there are other
>>> complicated cases.
>>
>> MODIFY_RETURN is also impacted by this patch.
>>
>>>
>>> Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao <benbjiang@...cent.com>
>>> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
>> [...]