Andrii Nakryiko (3): bpf: support non-r10 register spill/fill to/from stack in precision tracking selftests/bpf: add stack access precision test bpf: handle fake register spill to stack with BPF_ST_MEM instruction
Pu Lehui (1): bpf: Fix kabi breakage in struct bpf_verifier_state and bpf_verifier_env
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 35 +++- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 174 ++++++++++-------- .../bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c | 87 ++++++++- .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c | 38 ++-- 4 files changed, 232 insertions(+), 102 deletions(-)
From: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org
mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.8-rc1 commit 41f6f64e6999a837048b1bd13a2f8742964eca6b category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/IB2AQ3 CVE: CVE-2023-52920
Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
--------------------------------
Use instruction (jump) history to record instructions that performed register spill/fill to/from stack, regardless if this was done through read-only r10 register, or any other register after copying r10 into it *and* potentially adjusting offset.
To make this work reliably, we push extra per-instruction flags into instruction history, encoding stack slot index (spi) and stack frame number in extra 10 bit flags we take away from prev_idx in instruction history. We don't touch idx field for maximum performance, as it's checked most frequently during backtracking.
This change removes basically the last remaining practical limitation of precision backtracking logic in BPF verifier. It fixes known deficiencies, but also opens up new opportunities to reduce number of verified states, explored in the subsequent patches.
There are only three differences in selftests' BPF object files according to veristat, all in the positive direction (less states).
File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF) -------------------------------------- ------------- --------- --------- ------------- ---------- ---------- ------------- test_cls_redirect_dynptr.bpf.linked3.o cls_redirect 2987 2864 -123 (-4.12%) 240 231 -9 (-3.75%) xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_tc 82848 82661 -187 (-0.23%) 5107 5073 -34 (-0.67%) xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_xdp 85116 84964 -152 (-0.18%) 5162 5130 -32 (-0.62%)
Note, I avoided renaming jmp_history to more generic insn_hist to minimize number of lines changed and potential merge conflicts between bpf and bpf-next trees.
Notice also cur_hist_entry pointer reset to NULL at the beginning of instruction verification loop. This pointer avoids the problem of relying on last jump history entry's insn_idx to determine whether we already have entry for current instruction or not. It can happen that we added jump history entry because current instruction is_jmp_point(), but also we need to add instruction flags for stack access. In this case, we don't want to entries, so we need to reuse last added entry, if it is present.
Relying on insn_idx comparison has the same ambiguity problem as the one that was fixed recently in [0], so we avoid that.
[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20231110002638.4168352-...
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman eddyz87@gmail.com Reported-by: Tao Lyu tao.lyu@epfl.ch Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-2-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov ast@kernel.org Conflicts: kernel/bpf/verifier.c include/linux/bpf_verifier.h tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c [The conflicts were due to not merge commit 0c95c9fdb696] Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui pulehui@huawei.com --- include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 31 +++- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 175 ++++++++++-------- .../bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c | 23 ++- .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c | 38 ++-- 4 files changed, 169 insertions(+), 98 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h index 96eab612745c..6cbc3f6834b3 100644 --- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h +++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h @@ -341,12 +341,34 @@ struct bpf_func_state { KABI_RESERVE(4) };
-struct bpf_idx_pair { - u32 prev_idx; +#define MAX_CALL_FRAMES 8 + +/* instruction history flags, used in bpf_jmp_history_entry.flags field */ +enum { + /* instruction references stack slot through PTR_TO_STACK register; + * we also store stack's frame number in lower 3 bits (MAX_CALL_FRAMES is 8) + * and accessed stack slot's index in next 6 bits (MAX_BPF_STACK is 512, + * 8 bytes per slot, so slot index (spi) is [0, 63]) + */ + INSN_F_FRAMENO_MASK = 0x7, /* 3 bits */ + + INSN_F_SPI_MASK = 0x3f, /* 6 bits */ + INSN_F_SPI_SHIFT = 3, /* shifted 3 bits to the left */ + + INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS = BIT(9), /* we need 10 bits total */ +}; + +static_assert(INSN_F_FRAMENO_MASK + 1 >= MAX_CALL_FRAMES); +static_assert(INSN_F_SPI_MASK + 1 >= MAX_BPF_STACK / 8); + +struct bpf_jmp_history_entry { u32 idx; + /* insn idx can't be bigger than 1 million */ + u32 prev_idx : 22; + /* special flags, e.g., whether insn is doing register stack spill/load */ + u32 flags : 10; };
-#define MAX_CALL_FRAMES 8 /* Maximum number of register states that can exist at once */ #define BPF_ID_MAP_SIZE ((MAX_BPF_REG + MAX_BPF_STACK / BPF_REG_SIZE) * MAX_CALL_FRAMES) struct bpf_verifier_state { @@ -429,7 +451,7 @@ struct bpf_verifier_state { * For most states jmp_history_cnt is [0-3]. * For loops can go up to ~40. */ - struct bpf_idx_pair *jmp_history; + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *jmp_history; u32 jmp_history_cnt; u32 dfs_depth; u32 callback_unroll_depth; @@ -677,6 +699,7 @@ struct bpf_verifier_env { int cur_stack; } cfg; struct backtrack_state bt; + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *cur_hist_ent; u32 pass_cnt; /* number of times do_check() was called */ u32 subprog_cnt; /* number of instructions analyzed by the verifier */ diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 829ebeb9e94e..e8a6c99f617f 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -1769,8 +1769,8 @@ static int copy_verifier_state(struct bpf_verifier_state *dst_state, int i, err;
dst_state->jmp_history = copy_array(dst_state->jmp_history, src->jmp_history, - src->jmp_history_cnt, sizeof(struct bpf_idx_pair), - GFP_USER); + src->jmp_history_cnt, sizeof(*dst_state->jmp_history), + GFP_USER); if (!dst_state->jmp_history) return -ENOMEM; dst_state->jmp_history_cnt = src->jmp_history_cnt; @@ -3428,6 +3428,21 @@ static int check_reg_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 regno, return __check_reg_arg(env, state->regs, regno, t); }
+static int insn_stack_access_flags(int frameno, int spi) +{ + return INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS | (spi << INSN_F_SPI_SHIFT) | frameno; +} + +static int insn_stack_access_spi(int insn_flags) +{ + return (insn_flags >> INSN_F_SPI_SHIFT) & INSN_F_SPI_MASK; +} + +static int insn_stack_access_frameno(int insn_flags) +{ + return insn_flags & INSN_F_FRAMENO_MASK; +} + static void mark_jmp_point(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx) { env->insn_aux_data[idx].jmp_point = true; @@ -3439,28 +3454,51 @@ static bool is_jmp_point(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) }
/* for any branch, call, exit record the history of jmps in the given state */ -static int push_jmp_history(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, - struct bpf_verifier_state *cur) +static int push_jmp_history(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_verifier_state *cur, + int insn_flags) { u32 cnt = cur->jmp_history_cnt; - struct bpf_idx_pair *p; + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *p; size_t alloc_size;
- if (!is_jmp_point(env, env->insn_idx)) + /* combine instruction flags if we already recorded this instruction */ + if (env->cur_hist_ent) { + /* atomic instructions push insn_flags twice, for READ and + * WRITE sides, but they should agree on stack slot + */ + WARN_ONCE((env->cur_hist_ent->flags & insn_flags) && + (env->cur_hist_ent->flags & insn_flags) != insn_flags, + "verifier insn history bug: insn_idx %d cur flags %x new flags %x\n", + env->insn_idx, env->cur_hist_ent->flags, insn_flags); + env->cur_hist_ent->flags |= insn_flags; return 0; + }
cnt++; alloc_size = kmalloc_size_roundup(size_mul(cnt, sizeof(*p))); p = krealloc(cur->jmp_history, alloc_size, GFP_USER); if (!p) return -ENOMEM; - p[cnt - 1].idx = env->insn_idx; - p[cnt - 1].prev_idx = env->prev_insn_idx; cur->jmp_history = p; + + p = &cur->jmp_history[cnt - 1]; + p->idx = env->insn_idx; + p->prev_idx = env->prev_insn_idx; + p->flags = insn_flags; cur->jmp_history_cnt = cnt; + env->cur_hist_ent = p; + return 0; }
+static struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *get_jmp_hist_entry(struct bpf_verifier_state *st, + u32 hist_end, int insn_idx) +{ + if (hist_end > 0 && st->jmp_history[hist_end - 1].idx == insn_idx) + return &st->jmp_history[hist_end - 1]; + return NULL; +} + /* Backtrack one insn at a time. If idx is not at the top of recorded * history then previous instruction came from straight line execution. * Return -ENOENT if we exhausted all instructions within given state. @@ -3622,9 +3660,14 @@ static inline bool bt_is_reg_set(struct backtrack_state *bt, u32 reg) return bt->reg_masks[bt->frame] & (1 << reg); }
+static inline bool bt_is_frame_slot_set(struct backtrack_state *bt, u32 frame, u32 slot) +{ + return bt->stack_masks[frame] & (1ull << slot); +} + static inline bool bt_is_slot_set(struct backtrack_state *bt, u32 slot) { - return bt->stack_masks[bt->frame] & (1ull << slot); + return bt_is_frame_slot_set(bt, bt->frame, slot); }
/* format registers bitmask, e.g., "r0,r2,r4" for 0x15 mask */ @@ -3678,7 +3721,7 @@ static bool calls_callback(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx); * - *was* processed previously during backtracking. */ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, - struct backtrack_state *bt) + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *hist, struct backtrack_state *bt) { const struct bpf_insn_cbs cbs = { .cb_call = disasm_kfunc_name, @@ -3691,7 +3734,7 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, u8 mode = BPF_MODE(insn->code); u32 dreg = insn->dst_reg; u32 sreg = insn->src_reg; - u32 spi, i; + u32 spi, i, fr;
if (insn->code == 0) return 0; @@ -3754,20 +3797,15 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, * by 'precise' mark in corresponding register of this state. * No further tracking necessary. */ - if (insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_FP) + if (!hist || !(hist->flags & INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS)) return 0; - /* dreg = *(u64 *)[fp - off] was a fill from the stack. * that [fp - off] slot contains scalar that needs to be * tracked with precision */ - spi = (-insn->off - 1) / BPF_REG_SIZE; - if (spi >= 64) { - verbose(env, "BUG spi %d\n", spi); - WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug"); - return -EFAULT; - } - bt_set_slot(bt, spi); + spi = insn_stack_access_spi(hist->flags); + fr = insn_stack_access_frameno(hist->flags); + bt_set_frame_slot(bt, fr, spi); } else if (class == BPF_STX || class == BPF_ST) { if (bt_is_reg_set(bt, dreg)) /* stx & st shouldn't be using _scalar_ dst_reg @@ -3776,17 +3814,13 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, */ return -ENOTSUPP; /* scalars can only be spilled into stack */ - if (insn->dst_reg != BPF_REG_FP) + if (!hist || !(hist->flags & INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS)) return 0; - spi = (-insn->off - 1) / BPF_REG_SIZE; - if (spi >= 64) { - verbose(env, "BUG spi %d\n", spi); - WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug"); - return -EFAULT; - } - if (!bt_is_slot_set(bt, spi)) + spi = insn_stack_access_spi(hist->flags); + fr = insn_stack_access_frameno(hist->flags); + if (!bt_is_frame_slot_set(bt, fr, spi)) return 0; - bt_clear_slot(bt, spi); + bt_clear_frame_slot(bt, fr, spi); if (class == BPF_STX) bt_set_reg(bt, sreg); } else if (class == BPF_JMP || class == BPF_JMP32) { @@ -3830,10 +3864,14 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug"); return -EFAULT; } - /* we don't track register spills perfectly, - * so fallback to force-precise instead of failing */ - if (bt_stack_mask(bt) != 0) - return -ENOTSUPP; + /* we are now tracking register spills correctly, + * so any instance of leftover slots is a bug + */ + if (bt_stack_mask(bt) != 0) { + verbose(env, "BUG stack slots %llx\n", bt_stack_mask(bt)); + WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug (subprog leftover stack slots)"); + return -EFAULT; + } /* propagate r1-r5 to the caller */ for (i = BPF_REG_1; i <= BPF_REG_5; i++) { if (bt_is_reg_set(bt, i)) { @@ -3858,8 +3896,11 @@ static int backtrack_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int idx, int subseq_idx, WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug"); return -EFAULT; } - if (bt_stack_mask(bt) != 0) - return -ENOTSUPP; + if (bt_stack_mask(bt) != 0) { + verbose(env, "BUG stack slots %llx\n", bt_stack_mask(bt)); + WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug (callback leftover stack slots)"); + return -EFAULT; + } /* clear r1-r5 in callback subprog's mask */ for (i = BPF_REG_1; i <= BPF_REG_5; i++) bt_clear_reg(bt, i); @@ -4296,6 +4337,7 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno) for (;;) { DECLARE_BITMAP(mask, 64); u32 history = st->jmp_history_cnt; + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *hist;
if (env->log.level & BPF_LOG_LEVEL2) { verbose(env, "mark_precise: frame%d: last_idx %d first_idx %d subseq_idx %d \n", @@ -4359,7 +4401,8 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno) err = 0; skip_first = false; } else { - err = backtrack_insn(env, i, subseq_idx, bt); + hist = get_jmp_hist_entry(st, history, i); + err = backtrack_insn(env, i, subseq_idx, hist, bt); } if (err == -ENOTSUPP) { mark_all_scalars_precise(env, env->cur_state); @@ -4412,22 +4455,10 @@ static int __mark_chain_precision(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int regno) bitmap_from_u64(mask, bt_frame_stack_mask(bt, fr)); for_each_set_bit(i, mask, 64) { if (i >= func->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE) { - /* the sequence of instructions: - * 2: (bf) r3 = r10 - * 3: (7b) *(u64 *)(r3 -8) = r0 - * 4: (79) r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8) - * doesn't contain jmps. It's backtracked - * as a single block. - * During backtracking insn 3 is not recognized as - * stack access, so at the end of backtracking - * stack slot fp-8 is still marked in stack_mask. - * However the parent state may not have accessed - * fp-8 and it's "unallocated" stack space. - * In such case fallback to conservative. - */ - mark_all_scalars_precise(env, env->cur_state); - bt_reset(bt); - return 0; + verbose(env, "BUG backtracking (stack slot %d, total slots %d)\n", + i, func->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE); + WARN_ONCE(1, "verifier backtracking bug (stack slot out of bounds)"); + return -EFAULT; }
if (!is_spilled_scalar_reg(&func->stack[i])) { @@ -4592,7 +4623,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int i, slot = -off - 1, spi = slot / BPF_REG_SIZE, err; struct bpf_insn *insn = &env->prog->insnsi[insn_idx]; struct bpf_reg_state *reg = NULL; - u32 dst_reg = insn->dst_reg; + int insn_flags = insn_stack_access_flags(state->frameno, spi);
/* caller checked that off % size == 0 and -MAX_BPF_STACK <= off < 0, * so it's aligned access and [off, off + size) are within stack limits @@ -4630,17 +4661,6 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, mark_stack_slot_scratched(env, spi); if (reg && !(off % BPF_REG_SIZE) && register_is_bounded(reg) && !register_is_null(reg) && env->bpf_capable) { - if (dst_reg != BPF_REG_FP) { - /* The backtracking logic can only recognize explicit - * stack slot address like [fp - 8]. Other spill of - * scalar via different register has to be conservative. - * Backtrack from here and mark all registers as precise - * that contributed into 'reg' being a constant. - */ - err = mark_chain_precision(env, value_regno); - if (err) - return err; - } save_register_state(state, spi, reg, size); /* Break the relation on a narrowing spill. */ if (fls64(reg->umax_value) > BITS_PER_BYTE * size) @@ -4652,6 +4672,7 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, __mark_reg_known(&fake_reg, insn->imm); fake_reg.type = SCALAR_VALUE; save_register_state(state, spi, &fake_reg, size); + insn_flags = 0; /* not a register spill */ } else if (reg && is_spillable_regtype(reg->type)) { /* register containing pointer is being spilled into stack */ if (size != BPF_REG_SIZE) { @@ -4697,9 +4718,12 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
/* Mark slots affected by this stack write. */ for (i = 0; i < size; i++) - state->stack[spi].slot_type[(slot - i) % BPF_REG_SIZE] = - type; + state->stack[spi].slot_type[(slot - i) % BPF_REG_SIZE] = type; + insn_flags = 0; /* not a register spill */ } + + if (insn_flags) + return push_jmp_history(env, env->cur_state, insn_flags); return 0; }
@@ -4888,6 +4912,7 @@ static int check_stack_read_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int i, slot = -off - 1, spi = slot / BPF_REG_SIZE; struct bpf_reg_state *reg; u8 *stype, type; + int insn_flags = insn_stack_access_flags(reg_state->frameno, spi);
stype = reg_state->stack[spi].slot_type; reg = ®_state->stack[spi].spilled_ptr; @@ -4933,12 +4958,10 @@ static int check_stack_read_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, return -EACCES; } mark_reg_unknown(env, state->regs, dst_regno); + insn_flags = 0; /* not restoring original register state */ } state->regs[dst_regno].live |= REG_LIVE_WRITTEN; - return 0; - } - - if (dst_regno >= 0) { + } else if (dst_regno >= 0) { /* restore register state from stack */ copy_register_state(&state->regs[dst_regno], reg); /* mark reg as written since spilled pointer state likely @@ -4974,7 +4997,10 @@ static int check_stack_read_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, mark_reg_read(env, reg, reg->parent, REG_LIVE_READ64); if (dst_regno >= 0) mark_reg_stack_read(env, reg_state, off, off + size, dst_regno); + insn_flags = 0; /* we are not restoring spilled register */ } + if (insn_flags) + return push_jmp_history(env, env->cur_state, insn_flags); return 0; }
@@ -7081,7 +7107,6 @@ static int check_atomic(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx, struct bpf_i BPF_SIZE(insn->code), BPF_WRITE, -1, true, false); if (err) return err; - return 0; }
@@ -16864,7 +16889,8 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) * the precision needs to be propagated back in * the current state. */ - err = err ? : push_jmp_history(env, cur); + if (is_jmp_point(env, env->insn_idx)) + err = err ? : push_jmp_history(env, cur, 0); err = err ? : propagate_precision(env, &sl->state); if (err) return err; @@ -17088,6 +17114,9 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) u8 class; int err;
+ /* reset current history entry on each new instruction */ + env->cur_hist_ent = NULL; + env->prev_insn_idx = prev_insn_idx; if (env->insn_idx >= insn_cnt) { verbose(env, "invalid insn idx %d insn_cnt %d\n", @@ -17127,7 +17156,7 @@ static int do_check(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) }
if (is_jmp_point(env, env->insn_idx)) { - err = push_jmp_history(env, state); + err = push_jmp_history(env, state, 0); if (err) return err; } diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c index f61d623b1ce8..7c159b561862 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c @@ -541,11 +541,24 @@ static __u64 subprog_spill_reg_precise(void)
SEC("?raw_tp") __success __log_level(2) -/* precision backtracking can't currently handle stack access not through r10, - * so we won't be able to mark stack slot fp-8 as precise, and so will - * fallback to forcing all as precise - */ -__msg("mark_precise: frame0: falling back to forcing all scalars precise") +__msg("10: (0f) r1 += r7") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 10 first_idx 7 subseq_idx -1") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r7 stack= before 9: (bf) r1 = r8") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r7 stack= before 8: (27) r7 *= 4") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r7 stack= before 7: (79) r7 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=-8: R0_w=2 R6_w=1 R8_rw=map_value(off=0,ks=4,vs=16,imm=0) R10=fp0 fp-8_rw=P1") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 18 first_idx 0 subseq_idx 7") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-8 before 18: (95) exit") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs= stack= before 17: (0f) r0 += r2") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs= stack= before 16: (79) r2 = *(u64 *)(r1 +0)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs= stack= before 15: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs= stack= before 14: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r2") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs= stack= before 13: (7b) *(u64 *)(r1 +0) = r2") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs=r2 stack= before 6: (85) call pc+6") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r2 stack= before 5: (bf) r2 = r6") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 4: (07) r1 += -8") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 3: (bf) r1 = r10") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 2: (b7) r6 = 1") __naked int subprog_spill_into_parent_stack_slot_precise(void) { asm volatile ( diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c index 0d84dd1f38b6..8a2ff81d8350 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c @@ -140,10 +140,11 @@ .result = REJECT, }, { - "precise: ST insn causing spi > allocated_stack", + "precise: ST zero to stack insn is supported", .insns = { BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_10), BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_3, 123, 0), + /* not a register spill, so we stop precision propagation for R4 here */ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, -8, 0), BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10, -8), BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, -1), @@ -157,11 +158,11 @@ mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 4 first_idx 2\ mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 4\ mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 3\ - mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-8 before 2\ - mark_precise: frame0: falling back to forcing all scalars precise\ - force_precise: frame0: forcing r0 to be precise\ mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 5 first_idx 5\ - mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=:", + mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r0 stack=:\ + mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 4 first_idx 2\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 4\ + 5: R0=-1 R4=0", .result = VERBOSE_ACCEPT, .retval = -1, }, @@ -169,6 +170,8 @@ "precise: STX insn causing spi > allocated_stack", .insns = { BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32), + /* make later reg spill more interesting by having somewhat known scalar */ + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 0xff), BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_10), BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_3, 123, 0), BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_0, -8), @@ -179,18 +182,21 @@ }, .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, .flags = BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ, - .errstr = "mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 6 first_idx 6\ + .errstr = "mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 7 first_idx 7\ mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r4 stack=:\ - mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 5 first_idx 3\ - mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 5\ - mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 4\ - mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-8 before 3\ - mark_precise: frame0: falling back to forcing all scalars precise\ - force_precise: frame0: forcing r0 to be precise\ - force_precise: frame0: forcing r0 to be precise\ - force_precise: frame0: forcing r0 to be precise\ - force_precise: frame0: forcing r0 to be precise\ - mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 6 first_idx 6\ + mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 6 first_idx 4\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 6: (b7) r0 = -1\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r4 stack= before 5: (79) r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-8 before 4: (7b) *(u64 *)(r3 -8) = r0\ + mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r0 stack=:\ + mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 3 first_idx 3\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 3: (55) if r3 != 0x7b goto pc+0\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 2: (bf) r3 = r10\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 1: (57) r0 &= 255\ + mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs=r0 stack=:\ + mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 0 first_idx 0\ + mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 0: (85) call bpf_get_prandom_u32#7\ + mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 7 first_idx 7\ mark_precise: frame0: parent state regs= stack=:", .result = VERBOSE_ACCEPT, .retval = -1,
Offering: HULK hulk inclusion category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/IB2AQ3 CVE: CVE-2023-52920
--------------------------------
Fix kabi breakage in struct bpf_verifier_state and bpf_verifier_env.
Fixes: f6c4972ba798 ("bpf: support non-r10 register spill/fill to/from stack in precision tracking") Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui pulehui@huawei.com --- include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 12 +++++++++--- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h index 6cbc3f6834b3..1447d41474f5 100644 --- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h +++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h @@ -341,6 +341,12 @@ struct bpf_func_state { KABI_RESERVE(4) };
+KABI_BROKEN_REMOVE( +struct bpf_idx_pair { + u32 prev_idx; + u32 idx; +}) + #define MAX_CALL_FRAMES 8
/* instruction history flags, used in bpf_jmp_history_entry.flags field */ @@ -451,7 +457,8 @@ struct bpf_verifier_state { * For most states jmp_history_cnt is [0-3]. * For loops can go up to ~40. */ - struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *jmp_history; + KABI_REPLACE(struct bpf_idx_pair *jmp_history, + struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *jmp_history) u32 jmp_history_cnt; u32 dfs_depth; u32 callback_unroll_depth; @@ -699,7 +706,6 @@ struct bpf_verifier_env { int cur_stack; } cfg; struct backtrack_state bt; - struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *cur_hist_ent; u32 pass_cnt; /* number of times do_check() was called */ u32 subprog_cnt; /* number of instructions analyzed by the verifier */ @@ -733,7 +739,7 @@ struct bpf_verifier_env { */ char tmp_str_buf[TMP_STR_BUF_LEN];
- KABI_RESERVE(1) + KABI_USE(1, struct bpf_jmp_history_entry *cur_hist_ent) KABI_RESERVE(2) KABI_RESERVE(3) KABI_RESERVE(4)
From: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org
mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.8-rc1 commit 876301881c436bf38e83a2c0d276a24b642e4aab category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/IB2AQ3 CVE: CVE-2023-52920
Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
--------------------------------
Add a new selftests that validates precision tracking for stack access instruction, using both r10-based and non-r10-based accesses. For non-r10 ones we also make sure to have non-zero var_off to validate that final stack offset is tracked properly in instruction history information inside verifier.
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman eddyz87@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-3-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov ast@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui pulehui@huawei.com --- .../bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++-- 1 file changed, 59 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c index 7c159b561862..4b8b0f45d17d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_subprog_precision.c @@ -593,14 +593,68 @@ __naked int subprog_spill_into_parent_stack_slot_precise(void) ); }
-__naked __noinline __used -static __u64 subprog_with_checkpoint(void) +SEC("?raw_tp") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("17: (0f) r1 += r0") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: last_idx 17 first_idx 0 subseq_idx -1") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 16: (bf) r1 = r7") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 15: (27) r0 *= 4") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 14: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-16 before 13: (7b) *(u64 *)(r7 -8) = r0") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 12: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r8 +16)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-16 before 11: (7b) *(u64 *)(r8 +16) = r0") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 10: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r7 -8)") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs= stack=-16 before 9: (7b) *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r0") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 8: (07) r8 += -32") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 7: (bf) r8 = r10") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 6: (07) r7 += -8") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 5: (bf) r7 = r10") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r0 stack= before 21: (95) exit") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs=r0 stack= before 20: (bf) r0 = r1") +__msg("mark_precise: frame1: regs=r1 stack= before 4: (85) call pc+15") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r1 stack= before 3: (bf) r1 = r6") +__msg("mark_precise: frame0: regs=r6 stack= before 2: (b7) r6 = 1") +__naked int stack_slot_aliases_precision(void) { asm volatile ( - "r0 = 0;" - /* guaranteed checkpoint if BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ is used */ - "goto +0;" + "r6 = 1;" + /* pass r6 through r1 into subprog to get it back as r0; + * this whole chain will have to be marked as precise later + */ + "r1 = r6;" + "call identity_subprog;" + /* let's setup two registers that are aliased to r10 */ + "r7 = r10;" + "r7 += -8;" /* r7 = r10 - 8 */ + "r8 = r10;" + "r8 += -32;" /* r8 = r10 - 32 */ + /* now spill subprog's return value (a r6 -> r1 -> r0 chain) + * a few times through different stack pointer regs, making + * sure to use r10, r7, and r8 both in LDX and STX insns, and + * *importantly* also using a combination of const var_off and + * insn->off to validate that we record final stack slot + * correctly, instead of relying on just insn->off derivation, + * which is only valid for r10-based stack offset + */ + "*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r0;" + "r0 = *(u64 *)(r7 - 8);" /* r7 - 8 == r10 - 16 */ + "*(u64 *)(r8 + 16) = r0;" /* r8 + 16 = r10 - 16 */ + "r0 = *(u64 *)(r8 + 16);" + "*(u64 *)(r7 - 8) = r0;" + "r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);" + /* get ready to use r0 as an index into array to force precision */ + "r0 *= 4;" + "r1 = %[vals];" + /* here r0->r1->r6 chain is forced to be precise and has to be + * propagated back to the beginning, including through the + * subprog call and all the stack spills and loads + */ + "r1 += r0;" + "r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 0);" "exit;" + : + : __imm_ptr(vals) + : __clobber_common, "r6" ); }
From: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org
mainline inclusion from mainline-v6.8-rc1 commit 482d548d40b0af9af730e4869903d4433e44f014 category: bugfix bugzilla: https://gitee.com/src-openeuler/kernel/issues/IB2AQ3 CVE: CVE-2023-52920
Reference: https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?i...
--------------------------------
When verifier validates BPF_ST_MEM instruction that stores known constant to stack (e.g., *(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = 123), it effectively spills a fake register with a constant (but initially imprecise) value to a stack slot. Because read-side logic treats it as a proper register fill from stack slot, we need to mark such stack slot initialization as INSN_F_STACK_ACCESS instruction to stop precision backtracking from missing it.
Fixes: 41f6f64e6999 ("bpf: support non-r10 register spill/fill to/from stack in precision tracking") Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko andrii@kernel.org Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman eddyz87@gmail.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231209010958.66758-1-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov ast@kernel.org Conflicts: kernel/bpf/verifier.c [The conflicts were due to some minor issue] Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui pulehui@huawei.com --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 1 - 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index e8a6c99f617f..2901db02631d 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -4672,7 +4672,6 @@ static int check_stack_write_fixed_off(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, __mark_reg_known(&fake_reg, insn->imm); fake_reg.type = SCALAR_VALUE; save_register_state(state, spi, &fake_reg, size); - insn_flags = 0; /* not a register spill */ } else if (reg && is_spillable_regtype(reg->type)) { /* register containing pointer is being spilled into stack */ if (size != BPF_REG_SIZE) {
反馈： 您发送到kernel@openeuler.org的补丁/补丁集，已成功转换为PR！ PR链接地址： https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/pulls/13278 邮件列表地址：https://mailweb.openeuler.org/hyperkitty/list/kernel@openeuler.org/message/5...
FeedBack: The patch(es) which you have sent to kernel@openeuler.org mailing list has been converted to a pull request successfully! Pull request link: https://gitee.com/openeuler/kernel/pulls/13278 Mailing list address: https://mailweb.openeuler.org/hyperkitty/list/kernel@openeuler.org/message/5...
-
patchwork bot -
Pu Lehui