powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough #120

kernel-patches-bot · 2020-09-28T09:37:50Z

Pull request for series with
subject: powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?series=204533

The user defined label following "fallthrough" is not considered by GCC and causes build failure. kernel-source/include/linux/compiler_attributes.h:208:41: error: attribute 'fallthrough' not preceding a case label or default label [-Werror] 208 define fallthrough _attribute((fallthrough_)) ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ Signed-off-by: He Zhe <zhe.he@windriver.com>

kernel-patches-bot · 2020-09-28T09:37:51Z

Master branch: 87f92ac
series: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/list/?series=204533
version: 1

The BPF STX/LDX instruction uses offset relative to the FP to address stack space. Since the BPF_FP locates at the top of the frame, the offset is usually a negative number. However, arm64 str/ldr immediate instruction requires that offset be a positive number. Therefore, this patch tries to convert the offsets. The method is to find the negative offset furthest from the FP firstly. Then add it to the FP, calculate a bottom position, called FPB, and then adjust the offsets in other STR/LDX instructions relative to FPB. FPB is saved using the callee-saved register x27 of arm64 which is not used yet. Before adjusting the offset, the patch checks every instruction to ensure that the FP does not change in run-time. If the FP may change, no offset is adjusted. For example, for the following bpftrace command: bpftrace -e 'kprobe:do_sys_open { printf("opening: %s\n", str(arg1)); }' Without this patch, jited code(fragment): 0: bti c 4: stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! 8: mov x29, sp c: stp x19, x20, [sp, #-16]! 10: stp x21, x22, [sp, #-16]! 14: stp x25, x26, [sp, #-16]! 18: mov x25, sp 1c: mov x26, #0x0 // #0 20: bti j 24: sub sp, sp, #0x90 28: add x19, x0, #0x0 2c: mov x0, #0x0 // #0 30: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff78 // #-136 34: str x0, [x25, x10] 38: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff80 // #-128 3c: str x0, [x25, x10] 40: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff88 // #-120 44: str x0, [x25, x10] 48: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff90 // #-112 4c: str x0, [x25, x10] 50: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff98 // #-104 54: str x0, [x25, x10] 58: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffa0 // #-96 5c: str x0, [x25, x10] 60: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffa8 // #-88 64: str x0, [x25, x10] 68: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffb0 // #-80 6c: str x0, [x25, x10] 70: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffb8 // #-72 74: str x0, [x25, x10] 78: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffc0 // #-64 7c: str x0, [x25, x10] 80: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffc8 // #-56 84: str x0, [x25, x10] 88: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffd0 // #-48 8c: str x0, [x25, x10] 90: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffd8 // #-40 94: str x0, [x25, x10] 98: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffe0 // #-32 9c: str x0, [x25, x10] a0: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffe8 // #-24 a4: str x0, [x25, x10] a8: mov x10, #0xfffffffffffffff0 // #-16 ac: str x0, [x25, x10] b0: mov x10, #0xfffffffffffffff8 // #-8 b4: str x0, [x25, x10] b8: mov x10, #0x8 // #8 bc: ldr x2, [x19, x10] [...] With this patch, jited code(fragment): 0: bti c 4: stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! 8: mov x29, sp c: stp x19, x20, [sp, #-16]! 10: stp x21, x22, [sp, #-16]! 14: stp x25, x26, [sp, #-16]! 18: stp x27, x28, [sp, #-16]! 1c: mov x25, sp 20: sub x27, x25, #0x88 24: mov x26, #0x0 // #0 28: bti j 2c: sub sp, sp, #0x90 30: add x19, x0, #0x0 34: mov x0, #0x0 // #0 38: str x0, [x27] 3c: str x0, [x27, #8] 40: str x0, [x27, #16] 44: str x0, [x27, #24] 48: str x0, [x27, #32] 4c: str x0, [x27, #40] 50: str x0, [x27, #48] 54: str x0, [x27, #56] 58: str x0, [x27, #64] 5c: str x0, [x27, #72] 60: str x0, [x27, #80] 64: str x0, [x27, #88] 68: str x0, [x27, #96] 6c: str x0, [x27, #104] 70: str x0, [x27, #112] 74: str x0, [x27, #120] 78: str x0, [x27, #128] 7c: ldr x2, [x19, #8] [...] Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>

The BPF STX/LDX instruction uses offset relative to the FP to address stack space. Since the BPF_FP locates at the top of the frame, the offset is usually a negative number. However, arm64 str/ldr immediate instruction requires that offset be a positive number. Therefore, this patch tries to convert the offsets. The method is to find the negative offset furthest from the FP firstly. Then add it to the FP, calculate a bottom position, called FPB, and then adjust the offsets in other STR/LDX instructions relative to FPB. FPB is saved using the callee-saved register x27 of arm64 which is not used yet. Before adjusting the offset, the patch checks every instruction to ensure that the FP does not change in run-time. If the FP may change, no offset is adjusted. For example, for the following bpftrace command: bpftrace -e 'kprobe:do_sys_open { printf("opening: %s\n", str(arg1)); }' Without this patch, jited code(fragment): 0: bti c 4: stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! 8: mov x29, sp c: stp x19, x20, [sp, #-16]! 10: stp x21, x22, [sp, #-16]! 14: stp x25, x26, [sp, #-16]! 18: mov x25, sp 1c: mov x26, #0x0 // #0 20: bti j 24: sub sp, sp, #0x90 28: add x19, x0, #0x0 2c: mov x0, #0x0 // #0 30: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff78 // #-136 34: str x0, [x25, x10] 38: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff80 // #-128 3c: str x0, [x25, x10] 40: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff88 // #-120 44: str x0, [x25, x10] 48: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff90 // #-112 4c: str x0, [x25, x10] 50: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffff98 // #-104 54: str x0, [x25, x10] 58: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffa0 // #-96 5c: str x0, [x25, x10] 60: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffa8 // #-88 64: str x0, [x25, x10] 68: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffb0 // #-80 6c: str x0, [x25, x10] 70: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffb8 // #-72 74: str x0, [x25, x10] 78: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffc0 // #-64 7c: str x0, [x25, x10] 80: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffc8 // #-56 84: str x0, [x25, x10] 88: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffd0 // #-48 8c: str x0, [x25, x10] 90: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffd8 // #-40 94: str x0, [x25, x10] 98: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffe0 // #-32 9c: str x0, [x25, x10] a0: mov x10, #0xffffffffffffffe8 // #-24 a4: str x0, [x25, x10] a8: mov x10, #0xfffffffffffffff0 // #-16 ac: str x0, [x25, x10] b0: mov x10, #0xfffffffffffffff8 // #-8 b4: str x0, [x25, x10] b8: mov x10, #0x8 // #8 bc: ldr x2, [x19, x10] [...] With this patch, jited code(fragment): 0: bti c 4: stp x29, x30, [sp, #-16]! 8: mov x29, sp c: stp x19, x20, [sp, #-16]! 10: stp x21, x22, [sp, #-16]! 14: stp x25, x26, [sp, #-16]! 18: stp x27, x28, [sp, #-16]! 1c: mov x25, sp 20: sub x27, x25, #0x88 24: mov x26, #0x0 // #0 28: bti j 2c: sub sp, sp, #0x90 30: add x19, x0, #0x0 34: mov x0, #0x0 // #0 38: str x0, [x27] 3c: str x0, [x27, #8] 40: str x0, [x27, #16] 44: str x0, [x27, #24] 48: str x0, [x27, #32] 4c: str x0, [x27, #40] 50: str x0, [x27, #48] 54: str x0, [x27, #56] 58: str x0, [x27, #64] 5c: str x0, [x27, #72] 60: str x0, [x27, #80] 64: str x0, [x27, #88] 68: str x0, [x27, #96] 6c: str x0, [x27, #104] 70: str x0, [x27, #112] 74: str x0, [x27, #120] 78: str x0, [x27, #128] 7c: ldr x2, [x19, #8] [...] Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220321152852.2334294-4-xukuohai@huawei.com

The inline assembly for arm64's cmpxchg_double*() implementations use a +Q constraint to hazard against other accesses to the memory location being exchanged. However, the pointer passed to the constraint is a pointer to unsigned long, and thus the hazard only applies to the first 8 bytes of the location. GCC can take advantage of this, assuming that other portions of the location are unchanged, leading to a number of potential problems. This is similar to what we fixed back in commit: fee960b ("arm64: xchg: hazard against entire exchange variable") ... but we forgot to adjust cmpxchg_double*() similarly at the same time. The same problem applies, as demonstrated with the following test: | struct big { | u64 lo, hi; | } __aligned(128); | | unsigned long foo(struct big *b) | { | u64 hi_old, hi_new; | | hi_old = b->hi; | cmpxchg_double_local(&b->lo, &b->hi, 0x12, 0x34, 0x56, 0x78); | hi_new = b->hi; | | return hi_old ^ hi_new; | } ... which GCC 12.1.0 compiles as: | 0000000000000000 <foo>: | 0: d503233f paciasp | 4: aa0003e4 mov x4, x0 | 8: 1400000e b 40 <foo+0x40> | c: d2800240 mov x0, #0x12 // #18 | 10: d2800681 mov x1, #0x34 // #52 | 14: aa0003e5 mov x5, x0 | 18: aa0103e6 mov x6, x1 | 1c: d2800ac2 mov x2, #0x56 // #86 | 20: d2800f03 mov x3, #0x78 // #120 | 24: 48207c82 casp x0, x1, x2, x3, [x4] | 28: ca050000 eor x0, x0, x5 | 2c: ca060021 eor x1, x1, x6 | 30: aa010000 orr x0, x0, x1 | 34: d2800000 mov x0, #0x0 // #0 <--- BANG | 38: d50323bf autiasp | 3c: d65f03c0 ret | 40: d2800240 mov x0, #0x12 // #18 | 44: d2800681 mov x1, #0x34 // #52 | 48: d2800ac2 mov x2, #0x56 // #86 | 4c: d2800f03 mov x3, #0x78 // #120 | 50: f9800091 prfm pstl1strm, [x4] | 54: c87f1885 ldxp x5, x6, [x4] | 58: ca0000a5 eor x5, x5, x0 | 5c: ca0100c6 eor x6, x6, x1 | 60: aa0600a6 orr x6, x5, x6 | 64: b5000066 cbnz x6, 70 <foo+0x70> | 68: c8250c82 stxp w5, x2, x3, [x4] | 6c: 35ffff45 cbnz w5, 54 <foo+0x54> | 70: d2800000 mov x0, #0x0 // #0 <--- BANG | 74: d50323bf autiasp | 78: d65f03c0 ret Notice that at the lines with "BANG" comments, GCC has assumed that the higher 8 bytes are unchanged by the cmpxchg_double() call, and that `hi_old ^ hi_new` can be reduced to a constant zero, for both LSE and LL/SC versions of cmpxchg_double(). This patch fixes the issue by passing a pointer to __uint128_t into the +Q constraint, ensuring that the compiler hazards against the entire 16 bytes being modified. With this change, GCC 12.1.0 compiles the above test as: | 0000000000000000 <foo>: | 0: f9400407 ldr x7, [x0, #8] | 4: d503233f paciasp | 8: aa0003e4 mov x4, x0 | c: 1400000f b 48 <foo+0x48> | 10: d2800240 mov x0, #0x12 // #18 | 14: d2800681 mov x1, #0x34 // #52 | 18: aa0003e5 mov x5, x0 | 1c: aa0103e6 mov x6, x1 | 20: d2800ac2 mov x2, #0x56 // #86 | 24: d2800f03 mov x3, #0x78 // #120 | 28: 48207c82 casp x0, x1, x2, x3, [x4] | 2c: ca050000 eor x0, x0, x5 | 30: ca060021 eor x1, x1, x6 | 34: aa010000 orr x0, x0, x1 | 38: f9400480 ldr x0, [x4, #8] | 3c: d50323bf autiasp | 40: ca0000e0 eor x0, x7, x0 | 44: d65f03c0 ret | 48: d2800240 mov x0, #0x12 // #18 | 4c: d2800681 mov x1, #0x34 // #52 | 50: d2800ac2 mov x2, #0x56 // #86 | 54: d2800f03 mov x3, #0x78 // #120 | 58: f9800091 prfm pstl1strm, [x4] | 5c: c87f1885 ldxp x5, x6, [x4] | 60: ca0000a5 eor x5, x5, x0 | 64: ca0100c6 eor x6, x6, x1 | 68: aa0600a6 orr x6, x5, x6 | 6c: b5000066 cbnz x6, 78 <foo+0x78> | 70: c8250c82 stxp w5, x2, x3, [x4] | 74: 35ffff45 cbnz w5, 5c <foo+0x5c> | 78: f9400480 ldr x0, [x4, #8] | 7c: d50323bf autiasp | 80: ca0000e0 eor x0, x7, x0 | 84: d65f03c0 ret ... sampling the high 8 bytes before and after the cmpxchg, and performing an EOR, as we'd expect. For backporting, I've tested this atop linux-4.9.y with GCC 5.5.0. Note that linux-4.9.y is oldest currently supported stable release, and mandates GCC 5.1+. Unfortunately I couldn't get a GCC 5.1 binary to run on my machines due to library incompatibilities. I've also used a standalone test to check that we can use a __uint128_t pointer in a +Q constraint at least as far back as GCC 4.8.5 and LLVM 3.9.1. Fixes: 5284e1b ("arm64: xchg: Implement cmpxchg_double") Fixes: e9a4b79 ("arm64: cmpxchg_dbl: patch in lse instructions when supported by the CPU") Reported-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y6DEfQXymYVgL3oJ@boqun-archlinux/ Reported-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/Y6GXoO4qmH9OIZ5Q@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net/ Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org Cc: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Steve Capper <steve.capper@arm.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230104151626.3262137-1-mark.rutland@arm.com Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>

Like commit 1cf3bfc ("bpf: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs") for s390x, add support for 64-bit pointers to kfuncs for LoongArch. Since the infrastructure is already implemented in BPF core, the only thing need to be done is to override bpf_jit_supports_far_kfunc_call(). Before this change, several test_verifier tests failed: # ./test_verifier | grep # | grep FAIL #119/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with non-scalar FAIL #120/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with nesting depth > 4 FAIL #121/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with FAM FAIL #122/p calls: invalid kfunc call: reg->type != PTR_TO_CTX FAIL #123/p calls: invalid kfunc call: void * not allowed in func proto without mem size arg FAIL #124/p calls: trigger reg2btf_ids[reg->type] for reg->type > __BPF_REG_TYPE_MAX FAIL #125/p calls: invalid kfunc call: reg->off must be zero when passed to release kfunc FAIL #126/p calls: invalid kfunc call: don't match first member type when passed to release kfunc FAIL #127/p calls: invalid kfunc call: PTR_TO_BTF_ID with negative offset FAIL #128/p calls: invalid kfunc call: PTR_TO_BTF_ID with variable offset FAIL #129/p calls: invalid kfunc call: referenced arg needs refcounted PTR_TO_BTF_ID FAIL #130/p calls: valid kfunc call: referenced arg needs refcounted PTR_TO_BTF_ID FAIL #486/p map_kptr: ref: reference state created and released on xchg FAIL This is because the kfuncs in the loaded module are far away from __bpf_call_base: ffff800002009440 t bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail1 [bpf_testmod] 9000000002e128d8 T __bpf_call_base The offset relative to __bpf_call_base does NOT fit in s32, which breaks the assumption in BPF core. Enable bpf_jit_supports_far_kfunc_call() lifts this limit. Note that to reproduce the above result, tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config should be applied, and run the test with JIT enabled, unpriv BPF enabled. With this change, the test_verifier tests now all passed: # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 777 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Tested-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> Signed-off-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <chenhuacai@loongson.cn>

Add 3 test cases for skb dynptr used in tp_btf: - test_dynptr_skb_tp_btf: use skb dynptr in tp_btf and make sure it is read-only. - skb_invalid_ctx_fentry/skb_invalid_ctx_fexit: bpf_dynptr_from_skb should fail in fentry/fexit. In test_dynptr_skb_tp_btf, to trigger the tracepoint in kfree_skb, test_pkt_access is used for its test_run, as in kfree_skb.c. Because the test process is different from others, a new setup type is defined, i.e., SETUP_SKB_PROG_TP. The result is like: $ ./test_progs -t 'dynptr/test_dynptr_skb_tp_btf' #77/14 dynptr/test_dynptr_skb_tp_btf:OK #77 dynptr:OK #120 kfunc_dynptr_param:OK Summary: 2/1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED $ ./test_progs -t 'dynptr/skb_invalid_ctx_f' #77/83 dynptr/skb_invalid_ctx_fentry:OK #77/84 dynptr/skb_invalid_ctx_fexit:OK #77 dynptr:OK #120 kfunc_dynptr_param:OK Summary: 2/2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Also fix two coding style nits (change spaces to tabs). Signed-off-by: Philo Lu <lulie@linux.alibaba.com>

kernel-patches-bot and others added 2 commits September 28, 2020 02:37

adding ci files

537ef5b

kernel-patches-bot added bpf new V1 labels Sep 28, 2020

kernel-patches-bot closed this Sep 30, 2020

kernel-patches-bot deleted the series/204533=>bpf branch September 30, 2020 16:13

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough #120

powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough #120

kernel-patches-bot commented Sep 28, 2020

kernel-patches-bot commented Sep 28, 2020

powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough #120

powerpc: net: bpf_jit_comp: Fix misuse of fallthrough #120

Conversation

kernel-patches-bot commented Sep 28, 2020

kernel-patches-bot commented Sep 28, 2020