lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Aug]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectFwd: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Do more tight ALU bounds tracking
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Kuee k1r0a <liulin063@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 11:11 PM
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] bpf: Do more tight ALU bounds tracking
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>


On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 9:25 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>
> On 7/30/22 12:48 AM, Hao Luo wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 3:43 PM Youlin Li <liulin063@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> In adjust_scalar_min_max_vals(), let 32bit bounds learn from 64bit bounds
> >> to get more tight bounds tracking. Similar operation can be found in
> >> reg_set_min_max().
> >>
> >> Also, we can now fold reg_bounds_sync() into zext_32_to_64().
> >>
> >> Before:
> >>
> >> func#0 @0
> >> 0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
> >> 0: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
> >> 1: (b7) r1 = 0 ; R1_w=0
> >> 2: (87) r1 = -r1 ; R1_w=scalar()
> >> 3: (87) r1 = -r1 ; R1_w=scalar()
> >> 4: (c7) r1 s>>= 63 ; R1_w=scalar(smin=-1,smax=0)
> >> 5: (07) r1 += 2 ; R1_w=scalar(umin=1,umax=2,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff)) <--- [*]
> >> 6: (95) exit
> >>
> >> It can be seen that even if the 64bit bounds is clear here, the 32bit
> >> bounds is still in the state of 'UNKNOWN'.
> >>
> >> After:
> >>
> >> func#0 @0
> >> 0: R1=ctx(off=0,imm=0) R10=fp0
> >> 0: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0
> >> 1: (b7) r1 = 0 ; R1_w=0
> >> 2: (87) r1 = -r1 ; R1_w=scalar()
> >> 3: (87) r1 = -r1 ; R1_w=scalar()
> >> 4: (c7) r1 s>>= 63 ; R1_w=scalar(smin=-1,smax=0)
> >> 5: (07) r1 += 2 ; R1_w=scalar(umin=1,umax=2,var_off=(0x0; 0x3)) <--- [*]
> >> 6: (95) exit
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Youlin Li <liulin063@gmail.com>
> >
> > Looks good to me. Thanks Youlin.
> >
> > Acked-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
>
> Thanks Youlin! Looks like the patch breaks CI [0] e.g.:
>
> #142/p bounds check after truncation of non-boundary-crossing range FAIL
> Failed to load prog 'Permission denied'!
> invalid access to map value, value_size=8 off=16777215 size=1
> R0 max value is outside of the allowed memory range
> verification time 296 usec
> stack depth 8
> processed 15 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0 peak_states 0 mark_read 0
>
> Please take a look. Also it would be great to add a test_verifier selftest to
> assert above case from commit log against future changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Daniel
>
> [0] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/runs/7696324041?check_suite_focus=true

This test case fails because the 32bit boundary information is lost
after the 11th instruction is executed:
Before:
11: (07) r1 += 2147483647 ;
R1_w=scalar(umin=70866960383,umax=70866960638,var_off=(0x1000000000;
0xffffffff),u32_min=2147483647,u32_max=-2147483394)
After:
11: (07) r1 += 2147483647 ;
R1_w=scalar(umin=70866960383,umax=70866960638,var_off=(0x1000000000;
0xffffffff))

This may be because, in previous versions of the code, when
__reg_combine_64_into_32() was called, the 32bit boundary was
completely deduced from the 64bit boundary, so there was a call to
__mark_reg32_unbounded() in __reg_combine_64_into_32().

But now, before adjust_scalar_min_max_vals() calls
__reg_combine_64_into_32() , the 32bit bounds are already calculated
to some extent, and __mark_reg32_unbounded() will eliminate these
information.

Simply copying a code without __mark_reg32_unbounded() should work,
perhaps it would be more elegant to introduce a flag into
__reg_combine_64_into_32()?

Sorry for not completing the tests because I did not 'make selftests'
successfully, and uploaded the code that caused the error.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2022-08-08 17:15    [W:1.449 / U:0.048 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site