Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Filesystem corruption on fresh installation #178

Closed
LukasKnuth opened this issue Dec 30, 2012 · 4 comments
Closed

Filesystem corruption on fresh installation #178

LukasKnuth opened this issue Dec 30, 2012 · 4 comments

Comments

@LukasKnuth
Copy link

[    4.527962] systemd-journald[49]: Received SIGUSR1
[    4.674936] systemd-journald[49]: File /var/log/journal/5c49cb5bf08724338eb09a6900092bb0/system.journal corrupted or uncleanly shut down, renaming and replacing.
[    5.676943] NET: Registered protocol family 10
[    5.680870] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_UP): eth0: link is not ready
[    6.643331] ADDRCONF(NETDEV_CHANGE): eth0: link becomes ready
[    6.645404] smsc95xx 1-1.1:1.0: eth0: link up, 100Mbps, full-duplex, lpa 0xCDE1
[   17.491030] eth0: no IPv6 routers present
[ 1238.402703] mmc0: Timeout waiting for hardware interrupt - cmd25.
[ 1238.402748] mmc0: resetting ongoing cmd 25DMA before 4096/4096 [5]/[15] complete
[ 1238.407029] mmcblk0: error -110 transferring data, sector 1793592, nr 128, cmd response 0x900, card status 0x0
[ 1238.407261] mmc0: DMA IRQ 6 ignored - results were reset
[ 1238.407401] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793633
[ 1238.407427] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793640
[ 1238.407447] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793648
[ 1238.407464] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793656
[ 1238.407481] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793664
[ 1238.407498] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793672
[ 1238.407515] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793680
[ 1238.407531] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793688
[ 1238.407548] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793696
[ 1238.407565] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793704
[ 1238.407581] end_request: I/O error, dev mmcblk0, sector 1793712
[ 1238.407841] Aborting journal on device mmcblk0p2-8.
[ 1238.722224] EXT4-fs error (device mmcblk0p2): ext4_journal_start_sb:327: Detected aborted journal
[ 1238.722463] EXT4-fs (mmcblk0p2): Remounting filesystem read-only
[ 1248.917104] mmc0: Controller never released inhibit bit(s).
[ 1253.604583] mmcblk0: timed out sending r/w cmd command, card status 0x400b00
[ 3412.203789] systemd-journald[49]: Failed to write entry, ignoring: Read-only file system

This is the third time this happened to a (completely) new installation. Some data:

  • I'm using ArchLinux (3.2.27-18-ARCH+)
  • All packages (including the kernel) are up-to-date
  • I'm not over/underclocking anything.
  • I changed only the memory-split to give 256MB to the GPU (I have the 512MB Model B)
  • I'm powering the device with my Phone-charger (5V - 1AM)
  • USB-Devices attached are a Keyboard and the MCE IR-Receiver
  • I restarted this installation only once using sudo restart. No unclean shutdowns, no other shutdowns at all.
@licaon-kter
Copy link

3 times on the same card?

@LukasKnuth
Copy link
Author

Yes, same SD card.

@licaon-kter
Copy link

Try with another card?!

@LukasKnuth
Copy link
Author

It seems the problem was with the SD card.

kamalmostafa pushed a commit to kamalmostafa/raspberrypi-linux that referenced this issue Feb 3, 2013
commit 6ff1f3d upstream.

On AM3517, tx and rx interrupt are detected together with
the disconnect event. This generates a kernel panic in musb_interrupt,
because rx / tx are handled after disconnect.
This issue was seen on a Technexion's TAM3517 SOM. Unplugging a device,
tx / rx interrupts together with disconnect are detected. This brings
to kernel panic like this:

[   68.526153] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000011
[   68.534698] pgd = c0004000
[   68.537536] [00000011] *pgd=00000000
[   68.541351] Internal error: Oops: 17 [raspberrypi#1] ARM
[   68.545928] Modules linked in:
[   68.549163] CPU: 0    Not tainted  (3.6.0-rc5-00020-g9e05905 raspberrypi#178)
[   68.555694] PC is at rxstate+0x8/0xdc
[   68.559539] LR is at musb_interrupt+0x98/0x858
[   68.564239] pc : [<c035cd88>]    lr : [<c035af1c>]    psr: 40000193
[   68.564239] sp : ce83fb40  ip : d0906410  fp : 00000000
[   68.576293] r10: 00000000  r9 : cf3b0e40  r8 : 00000002
[   68.581817] r7 : 00000019  r6 : 00000001  r5 : 00000001  r4 : 000000d4
[   68.588684] r3 : 00000000  r2 : 00000000  r1 : ffffffcc  r0 : cf23c108
[   68.595550] Flags: nZcv  IRQs off  FIQs on  Mode SVC_32  ISA ARM  Segment ke

Note: this behavior is not seen with a USB hub, while it is
easy to reproduce connecting a USB-pen directly to the USB-A of
the board.

Drop tx / rx interrupts if disconnect is detected.

Signed-off-by: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
CC: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Tested-by: Dmitry Lifshitz <lifshitz@compulab.co.il>
Tested-by: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
hoerman pushed a commit to hoerman/linux.rpi that referenced this issue Feb 20, 2013
On AM3517, tx and rx interrupt are detected together with
the disconnect event. This generates a kernel panic in musb_interrupt,
because rx / tx are handled after disconnect.
This issue was seen on a Technexion's TAM3517 SOM. Unplugging a device,
tx / rx interrupts together with disconnect are detected. This brings
to kernel panic like this:

[   68.526153] Unable to handle kernel NULL pointer dereference at virtual address 00000011
[   68.534698] pgd = c0004000
[   68.537536] [00000011] *pgd=00000000
[   68.541351] Internal error: Oops: 17 [#1] ARM
[   68.545928] Modules linked in:
[   68.549163] CPU: 0    Not tainted  (3.6.0-rc5-00020-g9e05905 raspberrypi#178)
[   68.555694] PC is at rxstate+0x8/0xdc
[   68.559539] LR is at musb_interrupt+0x98/0x858
[   68.564239] pc : [<c035cd88>]    lr : [<c035af1c>]    psr: 40000193
[   68.564239] sp : ce83fb40  ip : d0906410  fp : 00000000
[   68.576293] r10: 00000000  r9 : cf3b0e40  r8 : 00000002
[   68.581817] r7 : 00000019  r6 : 00000001  r5 : 00000001  r4 : 000000d4
[   68.588684] r3 : 00000000  r2 : 00000000  r1 : ffffffcc  r0 : cf23c108
[   68.595550] Flags: nZcv  IRQs off  FIQs on  Mode SVC_32  ISA ARM  Segment ke

Note: this behavior is not seen with a USB hub, while it is
easy to reproduce connecting a USB-pen directly to the USB-A of
the board.

Drop tx / rx interrupts if disconnect is detected.

Signed-off-by: Stefano Babic <sbabic@denx.de>
CC: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # 3.5 3.6
Tested-by: Dmitry Lifshitz <lifshitz@compulab.co.il>
Tested-by: Igor Grinberg <grinberg@compulab.co.il>
Signed-off-by: Felipe Balbi <balbi@ti.com>
popcornmix pushed a commit that referenced this issue Oct 8, 2014
No need for rht_dereference() from rhashtable_destroy() since the
existing callers don't hold the mutex when invoking this function
from:

1) Netlink, this is called in case of memory allocation errors in the
   initialization path, no nl_sk_hash_lock is held.
2) Netfilter, this is called from the rcu callback, no nfnl_lock is
   held either.

I think it's reasonable to assume that the caller has to make sure
that no hash resizing may happen before releasing the bucket array.
Therefore, the caller should be responsible for releasing this in a
safe way, document this to make people aware of it.

This resolves a rcu lockdep splat in nft_hash:

===============================
[ INFO: suspicious RCU usage. ]
3.16.0+ #178 Not tainted
-------------------------------
lib/rhashtable.c:596 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage!

other info that might help us debug this:

rcu_scheduler_active = 1, debug_locks = 1
1 lock held by ksoftirqd/2/18:
 #0:  (rcu_callback){......}, at: [<ffffffff810918fd>] rcu_process_callbacks+0x27e/0x4c7

stack backtrace:
CPU: 2 PID: 18 Comm: ksoftirqd/2 Not tainted 3.16.0+ #178
Hardware name: LENOVO 23259H1/23259H1, BIOS G2ET32WW (1.12 ) 05/30/2012
 0000000000000001 ffff88011706bb68 ffffffff8143debc 0000000000000000
 ffff880117062610 ffff88011706bb98 ffffffff81077515 ffff8800ca041a50
 0000000000000004 ffff8800ca386480 ffff8800ca041a00 ffff88011706bbb8
Call Trace:
 [<ffffffff8143debc>] dump_stack+0x4e/0x68
 [<ffffffff81077515>] lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0xfa/0x103
 [<ffffffff81228b1b>] rhashtable_destroy+0x46/0x52
 [<ffffffffa06f21a7>] nft_hash_destroy+0x73/0x82 [nft_hash]

Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
Acked-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@suug.ch>
popcornmix pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210426192949.416837-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
popcornmix pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210426192949.416837-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
popcornmix pushed a commit that referenced this issue May 19, 2021
[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@cloudflare.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210426192949.416837-4-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants