Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 07/14] bpf: Allow nested BTF object to be refferenced by BTF object + offset

[Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>]

On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 06:52:21PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 25, 2020 at 4:49 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Adding btf_struct_address function that takes 2 BTF objects
> > and offset as arguments and checks whether object A is nested
> > in object B on given offset.
> >
> > This function will be used when checking the helper function
> > PTR_TO_BTF_ID arguments. If the argument has an offset value,
> > the btf_struct_address will check if the final address is
> > the expected BTF ID.
> >
> > This way we can access nested BTF objects under PTR_TO_BTF_ID
> > pointer type and pass them to helpers, while they still point
> > to valid kernel BTF objects.
> >
> > Using btf_struct_access to implement new btf_struct_address
> > function, because it already walks down the given BTF object.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
> > ---
> 
> This logic is very hard to follow. Each type I try to review it, I get
> lost very fast. TBH, this access_data struct is not just not helpful,
> but actually just complicates everything.

yea, it's one of the reasons I added extra function for that in first version

> 
> I'll get to this tomorrow morning with fresh brains and will try to do
> another pass.
> 
> [...]
> 
> >  int btf_resolve_helper_id(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
> >                           const struct bpf_func_proto *fn, int arg)
> >  {
> > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > index 7de98906ddf4..da7351184295 100644
> > --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> > @@ -3808,6 +3808,7 @@ static int check_func_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 arg,
> >         struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env), *reg = &regs[regno];
> >         enum bpf_reg_type expected_type, type = reg->type;
> >         enum bpf_arg_type arg_type = fn->arg_type[arg];
> > +       const struct btf_type *btf_type;
> >         int err = 0;
> >
> >         if (arg_type == ARG_DONTCARE)
> > @@ -3887,24 +3888,34 @@ static int check_func_arg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 arg,
> >                 expected_type = PTR_TO_BTF_ID;
> >                 if (type != expected_type)
> >                         goto err_type;
> > -               if (!fn->check_btf_id) {
> > -                       if (reg->btf_id != meta->btf_id) {
> > -                               verbose(env, "Helper has type %s got %s in R%d\n",
> > +               if (reg->off) {
> 
> 
> This non-zero offset only logic looks fishy, tbh. What if the struct
> you are trying to access is at offset zero? E.g., bpf_link is pretty
> much always a first field of whatever specific link struct it is
> contained within. The fact that we allow only non-zero offsets for
> such use case looks like an arbitrary limitation.

right, that's mistake, I was after path under struct file,
and did not realize this needs to be generic

thanks,
jirka

> 
> > +                       btf_type = btf_type_by_id(btf_vmlinux, reg->btf_id);
> > +                       if (btf_struct_address(&env->log, btf_type, reg->off, meta->btf_id)) {
> > +                               verbose(env, "Helper has type %s got %s in R%d, off %d\n",
> >                                         kernel_type_name(meta->btf_id),
> > +                                       kernel_type_name(reg->btf_id), regno, reg->off);
> > +                               return -EACCES;
> > +                       }
> 
> [...]
>