bpf: relax return code check for subprograms #345
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Currently verifier enforces return code checks for subprograms in the same manner as it does for program entry points. This prevents returning arbitrary scalar values from subprograms. Scalar type of returned values is checked by btf_prepare_func_args() and hence it should be safe to allow only scalars for now. Relax return code checks for subprograms and allow any correct scalar values. Signed-off-by: Dmitrii Banshchikov <me@ubique.spb.ru> Fixes: 51c39bb (bpf: Introduce function-by-function verification) Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
|
Master branch: 50431b4 |
|
At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=383833 irrelevant now. Closing PR. |
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 5, 2024
Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module exhibits the following failures: test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times) test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 301 PASS test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 555 PASS test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 268 PASS test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 269 PASS test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 460 PASS test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 320 PASS test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 222 PASS test_bpf: #320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476 eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported jited:0 273 PASS test_bpf: #344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported jited:0 432 PASS test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported jited:0 381 PASS test_bpf: #346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported jited:0 505 PASS test_bpf: #490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1 eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported jited:0 261 PASS test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed] Fix them by adding missing processing. Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions") Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 13, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 14, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 15, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 18, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 19, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 20, 2024
A64_LDRSW() takes three registers: Xt, Xn, Xm as arguments and it loads
and sign extends the value at address Xn + Xm into register Xt.
Currently, the offset is being directly used in place of the tmp
register which has the offset already loaded by the last emitted
instruction.
This will cause JIT failures. The easiest way to reproduce this is to
test the following code through test_bpf module:
{
"BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W",
.u.insns_int = {
BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, 0x00000000deadbeefULL),
BPF_LD_IMM64(R2, 0xffffffffdeadbeefULL),
BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, R10, R1, -7),
BPF_LDX_MEMSX(BPF_W, R0, R10, -7),
BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JNE, R0, R2, 1),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
INTERNAL,
{ },
{ { 0, 0 } },
.stack_depth = 7,
},
We need to use the offset as -7 to trigger this code path, there could
be other valid ways to trigger this from proper BPF programs as well.
This code is rejected by the JIT because -7 is passed to A64_LDRSW() but
it expects a valid register (0 - 31).
roott@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[11300.490371] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[11300.491750] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
[11300.493179] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.494133] aarch64_insn_encode_register: unknown register encoding -7
[11300.495292] FAIL to select_runtime err=-524
[11300.496804] test_bpf: Summary: 0 PASSED, 1 FAILED, [0/0 JIT'ed]
modprobe: ERROR: could not insert 'test_bpf': Invalid argument
Applying this patch fixes the issue.
root@pjy:~# modprobe test_bpf test_name="BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W"
[ 292.837436] test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
[ 292.839416] test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W jited:1 156 PASS
[ 292.844794] test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1/1 JIT'ed]
Fixes: cc88f54 ("bpf, arm64: Support sign-extension load instructions")
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20240312235917.103626-1-puranjay12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
Add a test case to assert that the skb->pkt_type which was set from the BPF program is retained from the netkit xmit side to the peer's device at tcx ingress location. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t netkit [...] ./test_progs -t netkit [ 1.140780] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 1.141127] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel [ 1.284601] tsc: Refined TSC clocksource calibration: 3408.006 MHz [ 1.286672] clocksource: tsc: mask: 0xffffffffffffffff max_cycles: 0x311fd9b189d, max_idle_ns: 440795225691 ns [ 1.290384] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc #345 tc_netkit_basic:OK #346 tc_netkit_device:OK #347 tc_netkit_multi_links:OK #348 tc_netkit_multi_opts:OK #349 tc_netkit_neigh_links:OK #350 tc_netkit_pkt_type:OK Summary: 6/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
Add a test case to assert that the skb->pkt_type which was set from the BPF program is retained from the netkit xmit side to the peer's device at tcx ingress location. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t netkit [...] ./test_progs -t netkit [ 1.140780] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 1.141127] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel [ 1.284601] tsc: Refined TSC clocksource calibration: 3408.006 MHz [ 1.286672] clocksource: tsc: mask: 0xffffffffffffffff max_cycles: 0x311fd9b189d, max_idle_ns: 440795225691 ns [ 1.290384] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc #345 tc_netkit_basic:OK #346 tc_netkit_device:OK #347 tc_netkit_multi_links:OK #348 tc_netkit_multi_opts:OK #349 tc_netkit_neigh_links:OK #350 tc_netkit_pkt_type:OK Summary: 6/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 25, 2024
Add a test case to assert that the skb->pkt_type which was set from the BPF program is retained from the netkit xmit side to the peer's device at tcx ingress location. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t netkit [...] ./test_progs -t netkit [ 1.140780] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 1.141127] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel [ 1.284601] tsc: Refined TSC clocksource calibration: 3408.006 MHz [ 1.286672] clocksource: tsc: mask: 0xffffffffffffffff max_cycles: 0x311fd9b189d, max_idle_ns: 440795225691 ns [ 1.290384] clocksource: Switched to clocksource tsc #345 tc_netkit_basic:OK #346 tc_netkit_device:OK #347 tc_netkit_multi_links:OK #348 tc_netkit_multi_opts:OK #349 tc_netkit_neigh_links:OK #350 tc_netkit_pkt_type:OK Summary: 6/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240524163619.26001-4-daniel@iogearbox.net Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link [...] ./test_progs -t tc_link [ 3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel #332 tc_links_after:OK #333 tc_links_append:OK #334 tc_links_basic:OK #335 tc_links_before:OK #336 tc_links_chain_classic:OK #337 tc_links_chain_mixed:OK #338 tc_links_dev_chain0:OK #339 tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK #340 tc_links_dev_mixed:OK #341 tc_links_ingress:OK #342 tc_links_invalid:OK #343 tc_links_prepend:OK #344 tc_links_replace:OK #345 tc_links_revision:OK Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link [...] ./test_progs -t tc_link [ 3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel #332 tc_links_after:OK #333 tc_links_append:OK #334 tc_links_basic:OK #335 tc_links_before:OK #336 tc_links_chain_classic:OK #337 tc_links_chain_mixed:OK #338 tc_links_dev_chain0:OK #339 tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK #340 tc_links_dev_mixed:OK #341 tc_links_ingress:OK #342 tc_links_invalid:OK #343 tc_links_prepend:OK #344 tc_links_replace:OK #345 tc_links_revision:OK Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
Add a test case which replaces an active ingress qdisc while keeping the miniq in-tact during the transition period to the new clsact qdisc. # ./vmtest.sh -- ./test_progs -t tc_link [...] ./test_progs -t tc_link [ 3.412871] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel. [ 3.413343] bpf_testmod: module verification failed: signature and/or required key missing - tainting kernel #332 tc_links_after:OK #333 tc_links_append:OK #334 tc_links_basic:OK #335 tc_links_before:OK #336 tc_links_chain_classic:OK #337 tc_links_chain_mixed:OK #338 tc_links_dev_chain0:OK #339 tc_links_dev_cleanup:OK #340 tc_links_dev_mixed:OK #341 tc_links_ingress:OK #342 tc_links_invalid:OK #343 tc_links_prepend:OK #344 tc_links_replace:OK #345 tc_links_revision:OK Summary: 14/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240708133130.11609-2-daniel@iogearbox.net Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pull request for series with
subject: bpf: relax return code check for subprograms
version: 2
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=383833