All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array
@ 2019-05-28 21:14 Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: media: properly use bpf_prog_array api Stanislav Fomichev
                   ` (3 more replies)
  0 siblings, 4 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Fomichev @ 2019-05-28 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: netdev, bpf; +Cc: davem, ast, daniel, Stanislav Fomichev, Roman Gushchin

Drop __rcu annotations and rcu read sections from bpf_prog_array
helper functions. They are not needed since all existing callers
call those helpers from the rcu update side while holding a mutex.
This guarantees that use-after-free could not happen.

In the next patches I'll fix the callers with missing
rcu_dereference_protected to make sparse/lockdep happy, the proper
way to use these helpers is:

	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs = ...;
	struct bpf_prog_array *p;

	mutex_lock(&mtx);
	p = rcu_dereference_protected(progs, lockdep_is_held(&mtx));
	bpf_prog_array_length(p);
	bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(p, ...);
	bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(p, ...);
	bpf_prog_array_copy_info(p, ...);
	bpf_prog_array_copy(p, ...);
	bpf_prog_array_free(p);
	mutex_unlock(&mtx);

No functional changes! rcu_dereference_protected with lockdep_is_held
should catch any cases where we update prog array without a mutex
(I've looked at existing call sites and I think we hold a mutex
everywhere).

Motivation is to fix sparse warnings:
kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9:    expected struct callback_head *head
kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9:    got struct callback_head [noderef] <asn:4> *
kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44: warning: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *item
kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *
kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *existing
kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *
kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *[assigned] existing
kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *

v2:
* remove comment about potential race; that can't happen
  because all callers are in rcu-update section

Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
---
 include/linux/bpf.h | 12 ++++++------
 kernel/bpf/core.c   | 37 +++++++++++++------------------------
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 30 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index d98141edb74b..ff3e00ff84d2 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -514,17 +514,17 @@ struct bpf_prog_array {
 };
 
 struct bpf_prog_array *bpf_prog_array_alloc(u32 prog_cnt, gfp_t flags);
-void bpf_prog_array_free(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs);
-int bpf_prog_array_length(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs);
-int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs,
+void bpf_prog_array_free(struct bpf_prog_array *progs);
+int bpf_prog_array_length(struct bpf_prog_array *progs);
+int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array *progs,
 				__u32 __user *prog_ids, u32 cnt);
 
-void bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs,
+void bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(struct bpf_prog_array *progs,
 				struct bpf_prog *old_prog);
-int bpf_prog_array_copy_info(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
+int bpf_prog_array_copy_info(struct bpf_prog_array *array,
 			     u32 *prog_ids, u32 request_cnt,
 			     u32 *prog_cnt);
-int bpf_prog_array_copy(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array,
+int bpf_prog_array_copy(struct bpf_prog_array *old_array,
 			struct bpf_prog *exclude_prog,
 			struct bpf_prog *include_prog,
 			struct bpf_prog_array **new_array);
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 3675b19ecb90..33fb292f2e30 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -1795,38 +1795,33 @@ struct bpf_prog_array *bpf_prog_array_alloc(u32 prog_cnt, gfp_t flags)
 	return &empty_prog_array.hdr;
 }
 
-void bpf_prog_array_free(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs)
+void bpf_prog_array_free(struct bpf_prog_array *progs)
 {
-	if (!progs ||
-	    progs == (struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *)&empty_prog_array.hdr)
+	if (!progs || progs == &empty_prog_array.hdr)
 		return;
 	kfree_rcu(progs, rcu);
 }
 
-int bpf_prog_array_length(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array)
+int bpf_prog_array_length(struct bpf_prog_array *array)
 {
 	struct bpf_prog_array_item *item;
 	u32 cnt = 0;
 
-	rcu_read_lock();
-	item = rcu_dereference(array)->items;
-	for (; item->prog; item++)
+	for (item = array->items; item->prog; item++)
 		if (item->prog != &dummy_bpf_prog.prog)
 			cnt++;
-	rcu_read_unlock();
 	return cnt;
 }
 
 
-static bool bpf_prog_array_copy_core(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
+static bool bpf_prog_array_copy_core(struct bpf_prog_array *array,
 				     u32 *prog_ids,
 				     u32 request_cnt)
 {
 	struct bpf_prog_array_item *item;
 	int i = 0;
 
-	item = rcu_dereference_check(array, 1)->items;
-	for (; item->prog; item++) {
+	for (item = array->items; item->prog; item++) {
 		if (item->prog == &dummy_bpf_prog.prog)
 			continue;
 		prog_ids[i] = item->prog->aux->id;
@@ -1839,7 +1834,7 @@ static bool bpf_prog_array_copy_core(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
 	return !!(item->prog);
 }
 
-int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
+int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array *array,
 				__u32 __user *prog_ids, u32 cnt)
 {
 	unsigned long err = 0;
@@ -1850,18 +1845,12 @@ int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
 	 * cnt = bpf_prog_array_length();
 	 * if (cnt > 0)
 	 *     bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(..., cnt);
-	 * so below kcalloc doesn't need extra cnt > 0 check, but
-	 * bpf_prog_array_length() releases rcu lock and
-	 * prog array could have been swapped with empty or larger array,
-	 * so always copy 'cnt' prog_ids to the user.
-	 * In a rare race the user will see zero prog_ids
+	 * so below kcalloc doesn't need extra cnt > 0 check.
 	 */
 	ids = kcalloc(cnt, sizeof(u32), GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
 	if (!ids)
 		return -ENOMEM;
-	rcu_read_lock();
 	nospc = bpf_prog_array_copy_core(array, ids, cnt);
-	rcu_read_unlock();
 	err = copy_to_user(prog_ids, ids, cnt * sizeof(u32));
 	kfree(ids);
 	if (err)
@@ -1871,19 +1860,19 @@ int bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-void bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
+void bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(struct bpf_prog_array *array,
 				struct bpf_prog *old_prog)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array_item *item = array->items;
+	struct bpf_prog_array_item *item;
 
-	for (; item->prog; item++)
+	for (item = array->items; item->prog; item++)
 		if (item->prog == old_prog) {
 			WRITE_ONCE(item->prog, &dummy_bpf_prog.prog);
 			break;
 		}
 }
 
-int bpf_prog_array_copy(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array,
+int bpf_prog_array_copy(struct bpf_prog_array *old_array,
 			struct bpf_prog *exclude_prog,
 			struct bpf_prog *include_prog,
 			struct bpf_prog_array **new_array)
@@ -1947,7 +1936,7 @@ int bpf_prog_array_copy(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array,
 	return 0;
 }
 
-int bpf_prog_array_copy_info(struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array,
+int bpf_prog_array_copy_info(struct bpf_prog_array *array,
 			     u32 *prog_ids, u32 request_cnt,
 			     u32 *prog_cnt)
 {
-- 
2.22.0.rc1.257.g3120a18244-goog


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: media: properly use bpf_prog_array api
  2019-05-28 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Stanislav Fomichev
@ 2019-05-28 21:14 ` Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: " Stanislav Fomichev
                   ` (2 subsequent siblings)
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Fomichev @ 2019-05-28 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: netdev, bpf
  Cc: davem, ast, daniel, Stanislav Fomichev, linux-media,
	Mauro Carvalho Chehab, Sean Young

Now that we don't have __rcu markers on the bpf_prog_array helpers,
let's use proper rcu_dereference_protected to obtain array pointer
under mutex.

Cc: linux-media@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mchehab@kernel.org>
Cc: Sean Young <sean@mess.org>
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
---
 drivers/media/rc/bpf-lirc.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++-------------
 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/media/rc/bpf-lirc.c b/drivers/media/rc/bpf-lirc.c
index ee657003c1a1..0a0ce620e4a2 100644
--- a/drivers/media/rc/bpf-lirc.c
+++ b/drivers/media/rc/bpf-lirc.c
@@ -8,6 +8,9 @@
 #include <linux/bpf_lirc.h>
 #include "rc-core-priv.h"
 
+#define lirc_rcu_dereference(p)						\
+	rcu_dereference_protected(p, lockdep_is_held(&ir_raw_handler_lock))
+
 /*
  * BPF interface for raw IR
  */
@@ -136,7 +139,7 @@ const struct bpf_verifier_ops lirc_mode2_verifier_ops = {
 
 static int lirc_bpf_attach(struct rc_dev *rcdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
 	struct bpf_prog_array *new_array;
 	struct ir_raw_event_ctrl *raw;
 	int ret;
@@ -154,12 +157,12 @@ static int lirc_bpf_attach(struct rc_dev *rcdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	if (raw->progs && bpf_prog_array_length(raw->progs) >= BPF_MAX_PROGS) {
+	old_array = lirc_rcu_dereference(raw->progs);
+	if (old_array && bpf_prog_array_length(old_array) >= BPF_MAX_PROGS) {
 		ret = -E2BIG;
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	old_array = raw->progs;
 	ret = bpf_prog_array_copy(old_array, NULL, prog, &new_array);
 	if (ret < 0)
 		goto unlock;
@@ -174,7 +177,7 @@ static int lirc_bpf_attach(struct rc_dev *rcdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
 
 static int lirc_bpf_detach(struct rc_dev *rcdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
 	struct bpf_prog_array *new_array;
 	struct ir_raw_event_ctrl *raw;
 	int ret;
@@ -192,7 +195,7 @@ static int lirc_bpf_detach(struct rc_dev *rcdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	old_array = raw->progs;
+	old_array = lirc_rcu_dereference(raw->progs);
 	ret = bpf_prog_array_copy(old_array, prog, NULL, &new_array);
 	/*
 	 * Do not use bpf_prog_array_delete_safe() as we would end up
@@ -223,21 +226,22 @@ void lirc_bpf_run(struct rc_dev *rcdev, u32 sample)
 /*
  * This should be called once the rc thread has been stopped, so there can be
  * no concurrent bpf execution.
+ *
+ * Should be called with the ir_raw_handler_lock held.
  */
 void lirc_bpf_free(struct rc_dev *rcdev)
 {
 	struct bpf_prog_array_item *item;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *array;
 
-	if (!rcdev->raw->progs)
+	array = lirc_rcu_dereference(rcdev->raw->progs);
+	if (!array)
 		return;
 
-	item = rcu_dereference(rcdev->raw->progs)->items;
-	while (item->prog) {
+	for (item = array->items; item->prog; item++)
 		bpf_prog_put(item->prog);
-		item++;
-	}
 
-	bpf_prog_array_free(rcdev->raw->progs);
+	bpf_prog_array_free(array);
 }
 
 int lirc_prog_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *prog)
@@ -290,7 +294,7 @@ int lirc_prog_detach(const union bpf_attr *attr)
 int lirc_prog_query(const union bpf_attr *attr, union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
 {
 	__u32 __user *prog_ids = u64_to_user_ptr(attr->query.prog_ids);
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *progs;
 	struct rc_dev *rcdev;
 	u32 cnt, flags = 0;
 	int ret;
@@ -311,7 +315,7 @@ int lirc_prog_query(const union bpf_attr *attr, union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
 	if (ret)
 		goto put;
 
-	progs = rcdev->raw->progs;
+	progs = lirc_rcu_dereference(rcdev->raw->progs);
 	cnt = progs ? bpf_prog_array_length(progs) : 0;
 
 	if (copy_to_user(&uattr->query.prog_cnt, &cnt, sizeof(cnt))) {
-- 
2.22.0.rc1.257.g3120a18244-goog


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: properly use bpf_prog_array api
  2019-05-28 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: media: properly use bpf_prog_array api Stanislav Fomichev
@ 2019-05-28 21:14 ` Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:48   ` Roman Gushchin
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] bpf: tracing: " Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-29 14:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Daniel Borkmann
  3 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Fomichev @ 2019-05-28 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: netdev, bpf; +Cc: davem, ast, daniel, Stanislav Fomichev, Roman Gushchin

Now that we don't have __rcu markers on the bpf_prog_array helpers,
let's use proper rcu_dereference_protected to obtain array pointer
under mutex.

We also don't need __rcu annotations on cgroup_bpf.inactive since
it's not read/updated concurrently.

v4:
* drop cgroup_rcu_xyz wrappers and use rcu APIs directly; presumably
  should be more clear to understand which mutex/refcount protects
  each particular place

v3:
* amend cgroup_rcu_dereference to include percpu_ref_is_dying;
  cgroup_bpf is now reference counted and we don't hold cgroup_mutex
  anymore in cgroup_bpf_release

v2:
* replace xchg with rcu_swap_protected

Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
---
 include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h |  2 +-
 kernel/bpf/cgroup.c        | 28 +++++++++++++++++-----------
 2 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h b/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
index 9f100fc422c3..b631ee75762d 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf-cgroup.h
@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ struct cgroup_bpf {
 	u32 flags[MAX_BPF_ATTACH_TYPE];
 
 	/* temp storage for effective prog array used by prog_attach/detach */
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *inactive;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *inactive;
 
 	/* reference counter used to detach bpf programs after cgroup removal */
 	struct percpu_ref refcnt;
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c b/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
index d995edbe816d..ff594eb86fd7 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/cgroup.c
@@ -38,6 +38,7 @@ static void cgroup_bpf_release(struct work_struct *work)
 	struct cgroup *cgrp = container_of(work, struct cgroup,
 					   bpf.release_work);
 	enum bpf_cgroup_storage_type stype;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
 	unsigned int type;
 
 	for (type = 0; type < ARRAY_SIZE(cgrp->bpf.progs); type++) {
@@ -54,7 +55,10 @@ static void cgroup_bpf_release(struct work_struct *work)
 			kfree(pl);
 			static_branch_dec(&cgroup_bpf_enabled_key);
 		}
-		bpf_prog_array_free(cgrp->bpf.effective[type]);
+		old_array = rcu_dereference_protected(
+				cgrp->bpf.effective[type],
+				percpu_ref_is_dying(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt));
+		bpf_prog_array_free(old_array);
 	}
 
 	percpu_ref_exit(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt);
@@ -126,7 +130,7 @@ static bool hierarchy_allows_attach(struct cgroup *cgrp,
  */
 static int compute_effective_progs(struct cgroup *cgrp,
 				   enum bpf_attach_type type,
-				   struct bpf_prog_array __rcu **array)
+				   struct bpf_prog_array **array)
 {
 	enum bpf_cgroup_storage_type stype;
 	struct bpf_prog_array *progs;
@@ -164,17 +168,16 @@ static int compute_effective_progs(struct cgroup *cgrp,
 		}
 	} while ((p = cgroup_parent(p)));
 
-	rcu_assign_pointer(*array, progs);
+	*array = progs;
 	return 0;
 }
 
 static void activate_effective_progs(struct cgroup *cgrp,
 				     enum bpf_attach_type type,
-				     struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *array)
+				     struct bpf_prog_array *old_array)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array;
-
-	old_array = xchg(&cgrp->bpf.effective[type], array);
+	rcu_swap_protected(cgrp->bpf.effective[type], old_array,
+			   lockdep_is_held(&cgroup_mutex));
 	/* free prog array after grace period, since __cgroup_bpf_run_*()
 	 * might be still walking the array
 	 */
@@ -191,7 +194,7 @@ int cgroup_bpf_inherit(struct cgroup *cgrp)
  * that array below is variable length
  */
 #define	NR ARRAY_SIZE(cgrp->bpf.effective)
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *arrays[NR] = {};
+	struct bpf_prog_array *arrays[NR] = {};
 	int ret, i;
 
 	ret = percpu_ref_init(&cgrp->bpf.refcnt, cgroup_bpf_release_fn, 0,
@@ -477,10 +480,14 @@ int __cgroup_bpf_query(struct cgroup *cgrp, const union bpf_attr *attr,
 	enum bpf_attach_type type = attr->query.attach_type;
 	struct list_head *progs = &cgrp->bpf.progs[type];
 	u32 flags = cgrp->bpf.flags[type];
+	struct bpf_prog_array *effective;
 	int cnt, ret = 0, i;
 
+	effective = rcu_dereference_protected(cgrp->bpf.effective[type],
+					      lockdep_is_held(&cgroup_mutex));
+
 	if (attr->query.query_flags & BPF_F_QUERY_EFFECTIVE)
-		cnt = bpf_prog_array_length(cgrp->bpf.effective[type]);
+		cnt = bpf_prog_array_length(effective);
 	else
 		cnt = prog_list_length(progs);
 
@@ -497,8 +504,7 @@ int __cgroup_bpf_query(struct cgroup *cgrp, const union bpf_attr *attr,
 	}
 
 	if (attr->query.query_flags & BPF_F_QUERY_EFFECTIVE) {
-		return bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(cgrp->bpf.effective[type],
-						   prog_ids, cnt);
+		return bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(effective, prog_ids, cnt);
 	} else {
 		struct bpf_prog_list *pl;
 		u32 id;
-- 
2.22.0.rc1.257.g3120a18244-goog


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] bpf: tracing: properly use bpf_prog_array api
  2019-05-28 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: media: properly use bpf_prog_array api Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: " Stanislav Fomichev
@ 2019-05-28 21:14 ` Stanislav Fomichev
  2019-05-29 14:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Daniel Borkmann
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stanislav Fomichev @ 2019-05-28 21:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: netdev, bpf
  Cc: davem, ast, daniel, Stanislav Fomichev, Steven Rostedt, Ingo Molnar

Now that we don't have __rcu markers on the bpf_prog_array helpers,
let's use proper rcu_dereference_protected to obtain array pointer
under mutex.

Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
---
 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index fe73926a07cd..3994a231eb92 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -19,6 +19,9 @@
 #include "trace_probe.h"
 #include "trace.h"
 
+#define bpf_event_rcu_dereference(p)					\
+	rcu_dereference_protected(p, lockdep_is_held(&bpf_event_mutex))
+
 #ifdef CONFIG_MODULES
 struct bpf_trace_module {
 	struct module *module;
@@ -1099,7 +1102,7 @@ static DEFINE_MUTEX(bpf_event_mutex);
 int perf_event_attach_bpf_prog(struct perf_event *event,
 			       struct bpf_prog *prog)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
 	struct bpf_prog_array *new_array;
 	int ret = -EEXIST;
 
@@ -1117,7 +1120,7 @@ int perf_event_attach_bpf_prog(struct perf_event *event,
 	if (event->prog)
 		goto unlock;
 
-	old_array = event->tp_event->prog_array;
+	old_array = bpf_event_rcu_dereference(event->tp_event->prog_array);
 	if (old_array &&
 	    bpf_prog_array_length(old_array) >= BPF_TRACE_MAX_PROGS) {
 		ret = -E2BIG;
@@ -1140,7 +1143,7 @@ int perf_event_attach_bpf_prog(struct perf_event *event,
 
 void perf_event_detach_bpf_prog(struct perf_event *event)
 {
-	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *old_array;
+	struct bpf_prog_array *old_array;
 	struct bpf_prog_array *new_array;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -1149,7 +1152,7 @@ void perf_event_detach_bpf_prog(struct perf_event *event)
 	if (!event->prog)
 		goto unlock;
 
-	old_array = event->tp_event->prog_array;
+	old_array = bpf_event_rcu_dereference(event->tp_event->prog_array);
 	ret = bpf_prog_array_copy(old_array, event->prog, NULL, &new_array);
 	if (ret == -ENOENT)
 		goto unlock;
@@ -1171,6 +1174,7 @@ int perf_event_query_prog_array(struct perf_event *event, void __user *info)
 {
 	struct perf_event_query_bpf __user *uquery = info;
 	struct perf_event_query_bpf query = {};
+	struct bpf_prog_array *progs;
 	u32 *ids, prog_cnt, ids_len;
 	int ret;
 
@@ -1195,10 +1199,8 @@ int perf_event_query_prog_array(struct perf_event *event, void __user *info)
 	 */
 
 	mutex_lock(&bpf_event_mutex);
-	ret = bpf_prog_array_copy_info(event->tp_event->prog_array,
-				       ids,
-				       ids_len,
-				       &prog_cnt);
+	progs = bpf_event_rcu_dereference(event->tp_event->prog_array);
+	ret = bpf_prog_array_copy_info(progs, ids, ids_len, &prog_cnt);
 	mutex_unlock(&bpf_event_mutex);
 
 	if (copy_to_user(&uquery->prog_cnt, &prog_cnt, sizeof(prog_cnt)) ||
-- 
2.22.0.rc1.257.g3120a18244-goog


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: properly use bpf_prog_array api
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: " Stanislav Fomichev
@ 2019-05-28 21:48   ` Roman Gushchin
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Roman Gushchin @ 2019-05-28 21:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stanislav Fomichev; +Cc: netdev, bpf, davem, ast, daniel

On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 02:14:43PM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Now that we don't have __rcu markers on the bpf_prog_array helpers,
> let's use proper rcu_dereference_protected to obtain array pointer
> under mutex.
> 
> We also don't need __rcu annotations on cgroup_bpf.inactive since
> it's not read/updated concurrently.
> 
> v4:
> * drop cgroup_rcu_xyz wrappers and use rcu APIs directly; presumably
>   should be more clear to understand which mutex/refcount protects
>   each particular place
> 
> v3:
> * amend cgroup_rcu_dereference to include percpu_ref_is_dying;
>   cgroup_bpf is now reference counted and we don't hold cgroup_mutex
>   anymore in cgroup_bpf_release
> 
> v2:
> * replace xchg with rcu_swap_protected
> 
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>

Yeah, the looks even better.

Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>

Thanks!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array
  2019-05-28 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Stanislav Fomichev
                   ` (2 preceding siblings ...)
  2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] bpf: tracing: " Stanislav Fomichev
@ 2019-05-29 14:08 ` Daniel Borkmann
  3 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Daniel Borkmann @ 2019-05-29 14:08 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Stanislav Fomichev, netdev, bpf; +Cc: davem, ast, Roman Gushchin

On 05/28/2019 11:14 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Drop __rcu annotations and rcu read sections from bpf_prog_array
> helper functions. They are not needed since all existing callers
> call those helpers from the rcu update side while holding a mutex.
> This guarantees that use-after-free could not happen.
> 
> In the next patches I'll fix the callers with missing
> rcu_dereference_protected to make sparse/lockdep happy, the proper
> way to use these helpers is:
> 
> 	struct bpf_prog_array __rcu *progs = ...;
> 	struct bpf_prog_array *p;
> 
> 	mutex_lock(&mtx);
> 	p = rcu_dereference_protected(progs, lockdep_is_held(&mtx));
> 	bpf_prog_array_length(p);
> 	bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user(p, ...);
> 	bpf_prog_array_delete_safe(p, ...);
> 	bpf_prog_array_copy_info(p, ...);
> 	bpf_prog_array_copy(p, ...);
> 	bpf_prog_array_free(p);
> 	mutex_unlock(&mtx);
> 
> No functional changes! rcu_dereference_protected with lockdep_is_held
> should catch any cases where we update prog array without a mutex
> (I've looked at existing call sites and I think we hold a mutex
> everywhere).
> 
> Motivation is to fix sparse warnings:
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9: warning: incorrect type in argument 1 (different address spaces)
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9:    expected struct callback_head *head
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1803:9:    got struct callback_head [noderef] <asn:4> *
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44: warning: incorrect type in initializer (different address spaces)
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *item
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1877:44:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *existing
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1901:26:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26: warning: incorrect type in assignment (different address spaces)
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26:    expected struct bpf_prog_array_item *[assigned] existing
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1935:26:    got struct bpf_prog_array_item [noderef] <asn:4> *
> 
> v2:
> * remove comment about potential race; that can't happen
>   because all callers are in rcu-update section
> 
> Cc: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Acked-by: Roman Gushchin <guro@fb.com>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>

Series applied, thanks!

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2019-05-29 14:08 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2019-05-28 21:14 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: media: properly use bpf_prog_array api Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] bpf: cgroup: " Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-28 21:48   ` Roman Gushchin
2019-05-28 21:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] bpf: tracing: " Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-29 14:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: remove __rcu annotations from bpf_prog_array Daniel Borkmann

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.