netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix potential premature unload in bpf

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

Message-ID: <ZZ5R-3FAHNoDStqc@wtfbox.lan>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2024 09:14:51 +0100
From: Artem Savkov <asavkov@...hat.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jolsa@...nel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix potential premature unload
 in bpf_testmod

On Tue, Jan 09, 2024 at 11:40:38AM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> 
> On 1/9/24 8:43 AM, Artem Savkov wrote:
> > It is possible for bpf_kfunc_call_test_release() to be called from
> > bpf_map_free_deferred() when bpf_testmod is already unloaded and
> > perf_test_stuct.cnt which it tries to decrease is no longer in memory.
> > This patch tries to fix the issue by waiting for all references to be
> > dropped in bpf_testmod_exit().
> > 
> > The issue can be triggered by running 'test_progs -t map_kptr' in 6.5,
> > but is obscured in 6.6 by d119357d07435 ("rcu-tasks: Treat only
> > synchronous grace periods urgently").
> > 
> > Fixes: 65eb006d85a2a ("bpf: Move kernel test kfuncs to bpf_testmod")
> 
> Please add your Signed-off-by tag.

Thanks for noticing. Will resend with signed-off-by and your ack.

> I think the root cause is that bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire() kfunc
> is defined in bpf_testmod and the kfunc returns some data in bpf_testmod.
> But the release function bpf_kfunc_call_test_release() is in the kernel.
> The release func tries to access some data in bpf_testmod which might
> have been unloaded. The prog_test_ref_kfunc is defined in the kernel, so
> no bpf_testmod btf reference is hold so bpf_testmod can be unloaded before
> bpf_kfunc_call_test_release().
> As you mentioned, we won't have this issue if bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire()
> is also in the kernel.
> 
> I think putting bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire() in bpf_testmod and
> bpf_kfunc_call_test_release() in kernel is not a good idea and confusing.
> But since this is only for tests, I guess we can live with that. With that,

Correct. 65eb006d85a2a ("bpf: Move kernel test kfuncs to bpf_testmod")
also mentions why bpf_kfunc_call_test_release() is not in the module and
states that this is temporary. I'll add a comment in v2 so the wait can
be removed once the functions are re-united.
 
> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>
> 
> > ---
> >   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 4 ++++
> >   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > index 91907b321f913..63f0dbd016703 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c
> > @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
> >   /* Copyright (c) 2020 Facebook */
> >   #include <linux/btf.h>
> >   #include <linux/btf_ids.h>
> > +#include <linux/delay.h>
> >   #include <linux/error-injection.h>
> >   #include <linux/init.h>
> >   #include <linux/module.h>
> > @@ -544,6 +545,9 @@ static int bpf_testmod_init(void)
> >   static void bpf_testmod_exit(void)
> >   {
> > +	while (refcount_read(&prog_test_struct.cnt) > 1)
> > +		msleep(20);
> > +
> >   	return sysfs_remove_bin_file(kernel_kobj, &bin_attr_bpf_testmod_file);
> >   }
> 

-- 
Regards,
  Artem