Netdev Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
To: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] libbpf: sanitize BPF program code for bpf_probe_read_{kernel,user}[_str]
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2020 13:11:52 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEf4BzZ8y=fFBhwP_+owtYA45WNaa324OVftUF3jW-=Mgy45Yw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e37c5162-3c94-4c73-d598-f2a048b2ff27@fb.com>

On Tue, Aug 18, 2020 at 6:42 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 8/18/20 2:33 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > Add BPF program code sanitization pass, replacing calls to BPF
> > bpf_probe_read_{kernel,user}[_str]() helpers with bpf_probe_read[_str](), if
> > libbpf detects that kernel doesn't support new variants.
>
> I know this has been merged. The whole patch set looks good to me.
> A few nit or questions below.
>
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
> > ---
> >   tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 80 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >   1 file changed, 80 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > index ab0c3a409eea..bdc08f89a5c0 100644
> > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
> > @@ -180,6 +180,8 @@ enum kern_feature_id {
> >       FEAT_ARRAY_MMAP,
> >       /* kernel support for expected_attach_type in BPF_PROG_LOAD */
> >       FEAT_EXP_ATTACH_TYPE,
> > +     /* bpf_probe_read_{kernel,user}[_str] helpers */
> > +     FEAT_PROBE_READ_KERN,
> >       __FEAT_CNT,
> >   };
> >
> > @@ -3591,6 +3593,27 @@ static int probe_kern_exp_attach_type(void)
> >       return probe_fd(bpf_load_program_xattr(&attr, NULL, 0));
> >   }
> >
> [...]
> >
> > +static bool insn_is_helper_call(struct bpf_insn *insn, enum bpf_func_id *func_id)
> > +{
> > +     __u8 class = BPF_CLASS(insn->code);
> > +
> > +     if ((class == BPF_JMP || class == BPF_JMP32) &&
>
> Do we support BPF_JMP32 + BPF_CALL ... as a helper call?
> I am not aware of this.

Verifier seems to support both. Check do_check in
kernel/bpf/verifier.c, around line 9000. So I decided to also support
it, even if Clang doesn't emit it (yet?).

>
> > +         BPF_OP(insn->code) == BPF_CALL &&
> > +         BPF_SRC(insn->code) == BPF_K &&
> > +         insn->src_reg == 0 && insn->dst_reg == 0) {
> > +                 if (func_id)
> > +                         *func_id = insn->imm;
>
> looks like func_id is always non-NULL. Unless this is to support future
> usage where func_id may be NULL, the above condition probably not needed.

Yeah, not sure why I assumed it might be optional, maybe the first
version of the code used to pass NULL in some other place. But I think
it's fine, this is a generic helper function that might be used later
as well. So I'd just keep it as is, it doesn't hurt.

>
> > +                 return true;
> > +     }
> > +     return false;
> > +}
> > +
> [...]

  reply	other threads:[~2020-08-19 20:12 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-08-18 21:33 [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] libbpf feature probing and sanitization improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/7] libbpf: disable -Wswitch-enum compiler warning Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-19  1:23   ` Yonghong Song
2020-08-19  1:39     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-19  5:44       ` Yonghong Song
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/7] libbpf: make kernel feature probing lazy Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/7] libbpf: factor out common logic of testing and closing FD Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] libbpf: sanitize BPF program code for bpf_probe_read_{kernel,user}[_str] Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-19  1:42   ` Yonghong Song
2020-08-19 20:11     ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2020-08-19 20:15       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-08-19 20:23         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/7] selftests/bpf: fix test_vmlinux test to use bpf_probe_read_user() Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] libbpf: switch tracing and CO-RE helper macros to bpf_probe_read_kernel() Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-18 21:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/7] libbpf: detect minimal BTF support and skip BTF loading, if missing Andrii Nakryiko
2020-08-19  0:24 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] libbpf feature probing and sanitization improvements Alexei Starovoitov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CAEf4BzZ8y=fFBhwP_+owtYA45WNaa324OVftUF3jW-=Mgy45Yw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=andriin@fb.com \
    --cc=ast@fb.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] libbpf: sanitize BPF program code for bpf_probe_read_{kernel,user}[_str]' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).