BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com>, Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra" <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/3] bpf: implement bpf_send_signal() helper
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 21:07:18 +0000
Message-ID: <bc855846-450f-bc0f-34e3-7219c95fb620@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d863ad02-5151-3e3c-a276-404c9dc957b2@iogearbox.net>



On 5/23/19 9:28 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 05/23/2019 05:58 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
>> On 5/23/19 8:41 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>>> On 05/22/2019 07:39 AM, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>>> This patch tries to solve the following specific use case.
>>>>
>>>> Currently, bpf program can already collect stack traces
>>>> through kernel function get_perf_callchain()
>>>> when certain events happens (e.g., cache miss counter or
>>>> cpu clock counter overflows). But such stack traces are
>>>> not enough for jitted programs, e.g., hhvm (jited php).
>>>> To get real stack trace, jit engine internal data structures
>>>> need to be traversed in order to get the real user functions.
>>>>
>>>> bpf program itself may not be the best place to traverse
>>>> the jit engine as the traversing logic could be complex and
>>>> it is not a stable interface either.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, hhvm implements a signal handler,
>>>> e.g. for SIGALARM, and a set of program locations which
>>>> it can dump stack traces. When it receives a signal, it will
>>>> dump the stack in next such program location.
>>>>
>>>> Such a mechanism can be implemented in the following way:
>>>>     . a perf ring buffer is created between bpf program
>>>>       and tracing app.
>>>>     . once a particular event happens, bpf program writes
>>>>       to the ring buffer and the tracing app gets notified.
>>>>     . the tracing app sends a signal SIGALARM to the hhvm.
>>>>
>>>> But this method could have large delays and causing profiling
>>>> results skewed.
>>>>
>>>> This patch implements bpf_send_signal() helper to send
>>>> a signal to hhvm in real time, resulting in intended stack traces.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>    include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 17 +++++++++-
>>>>    kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 67 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>>    2 files changed, 83 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> index 63e0cf66f01a..68d4470523a0 100644
>>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> @@ -2672,6 +2672,20 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>>>     *		0 on success.
>>>>     *
>>>>     *		**-ENOENT** if the bpf-local-storage cannot be found.
>>>> + *
>>>> + * int bpf_send_signal(u32 sig)
>>>> + *	Description
>>>> + *		Send signal *sig* to the current task.
>>>> + *	Return
>>>> + *		0 on success or successfully queued.
>>>> + *
>>>> + *		**-EBUSY** if work queue under nmi is full.
>>>> + *
>>>> + *		**-EINVAL** if *sig* is invalid.
>>>> + *
>>>> + *		**-EPERM** if no permission to send the *sig*.
>>>> + *
>>>> + *		**-EAGAIN** if bpf program can try again.
>>>>     */
>>>>    #define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN)		\
>>>>    	FN(unspec),			\
>>>> @@ -2782,7 +2796,8 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>>>    	FN(strtol),			\
>>>>    	FN(strtoul),			\
>>>>    	FN(sk_storage_get),		\
>>>> -	FN(sk_storage_delete),
>>>> +	FN(sk_storage_delete),		\
>>>> +	FN(send_signal),
>>>>    
>>>>    /* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
>>>>     * function eBPF program intends to call
>>>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>>>> index f92d6ad5e080..f8cd0db7289f 100644
>>>> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>>>> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>>>> @@ -567,6 +567,58 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_probe_read_str_proto = {
>>>>    	.arg3_type	= ARG_ANYTHING,
>>>>    };
>>>>    
>>>> +struct send_signal_irq_work {
>>>> +	struct irq_work irq_work;
>>>> +	u32 sig;
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct send_signal_irq_work, send_signal_work);
>>>> +
>>>> +static void do_bpf_send_signal(struct irq_work *entry)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct send_signal_irq_work *work;
>>>> +
>>>> +	work = container_of(entry, struct send_signal_irq_work, irq_work);
>>>> +	group_send_sig_info(work->sig, SEND_SIG_PRIV, current, PIDTYPE_TGID);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +BPF_CALL_1(bpf_send_signal, u32, sig)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct send_signal_irq_work *work = NULL;
>>>> +
>>>> +	/* Similar to bpf_probe_write_user, task needs to be
>>>> +	 * in a sound condition and kernel memory access be
>>>> +	 * permitted in order to send signal to the current
>>>> +	 * task.
>>>> +	 */
>>>> +	if (unlikely(current->flags & (PF_KTHREAD | PF_EXITING)))
>>>> +		return -EPERM;
>>>> +	if (unlikely(uaccess_kernel()))
>>>> +		return -EPERM;
>>>> +	if (unlikely(!nmi_uaccess_okay()))
>>>> +		return -EPERM;
>>>> +
>>>> +	if (in_nmi()) {
>>>
>>> Hm, bit confused, can't this only be done out of process context in
>>> general since only there current points to e.g. hhvm? I'm probably
>>> missing something. Could you elaborate?
>>
>> That is true. If in nmi, it is out of process context and in nmi
>> context, we use an irq_work here since group_send_sig_info() has
>> spinlock inside. The bpf program (e.g., a perf_event program) needs to
>> check it is with right current (e.g., by pid) before calling
>> this helper.
>>
>> Does this address your question?

Thanks, Daniel. The below are really good questions which I did not
really think through with irq_work.

> 
> Hm, but how is it guaranteed that 'current' inside the callback is still
> the very same you intend to send the signal to?

I went through irq_work infrastructure. It looks that "current" may
change. irq_work is registered as an interrupt on x86.
After nmi, some lower priority
interrupts get chances to execute including irq_work. But there are some
other interrupts like timer_interrupt and reschedule_interrupt may 
change "current". But since we are still in interrupt context, task 
should not be destroyed, so the task structure pointer is still valid.

I will pass "current" task struct pointer to irq_work as well. This
is similar to what we did in stackmap.c:
   work->sem = &current->mm->mmap_sem;
   irq_work_queue(&work->irq_work);
At irq_work_run() time, the previous "current" in nmi should still be
valid.

> 
> What happens if you're in softirq and send SIGKILL to yourself? Is this
> ignored/handled gracefully in such case?

It is not ignored. It handled gracefully in this case. I tried my 
example to send SIGKILL. The call stack looks below.

[   24.211943]  bpf_send_signal+0x9/0xb0
[   24.212427]  bpf_prog_fec6e7cc664d5b91_bpf_send_signal_test+0x228/0x1000
[   24.213249]  ? bpf_overflow_handler+0xb7/0x180
[   24.213853]  ? __perf_event_overflow+0x51/0xe0
[   24.214385]  ? perf_swevent_hrtimer+0x10a/0x160
[   24.214965]  ? __update_load_avg_cfs_rq+0x1a9/0x1c0
[   24.215609]  ? task_tick_fair+0x50/0x690
[   24.216104]  ? run_timer_softirq+0x208/0x490
[   24.216637]  ? timerqueue_del+0x1e/0x40
[   24.217111]  ? task_clock_event_del+0x10/0x10
[   24.217658]  ? __hrtimer_run_queues+0x10d/0x2c0
[   24.218217]  ? hrtimer_interrupt+0x122/0x270
[   24.218765]  ? rcu_irq_enter+0x31/0x110
[   24.219223]  ? smp_apic_timer_interrupt+0x67/0x160
[   24.219842]  ? apic_timer_interrupt+0xf/0x20
[   24.220383]  </IRQ>
[   24.220655]  ? event_sched_out.isra.108+0x150/0x150
[   24.221271]  ? smp_call_function_single+0xdc/0x100
[   24.221898]  ? perf_event_sysfs_show+0x20/0x20
[   24.222469]  ? cpu_function_call+0x42/0x60
[   24.222982]  ? cpu_clock_event_read+0x10/0x10
[   24.223525]  ? event_function_call+0xe6/0xf0
[   24.224053]  ? event_sched_out.isra.108+0x150/0x150
[   24.224657]  ? perf_remove_from_context+0x20/0x70
[   24.225262]  ? perf_event_release_kernel+0x106/0x2e0
[   24.225896]  ? perf_release+0xc/0x10
[   24.226347]  ? __fput+0xc9/0x230
[   24.226767]  ? task_work_run+0x83/0xb0
[   24.227243]  ? do_exit+0x300/0xc50
[   24.227674]  ? syscall_trace_enter+0x1c9/0x2d0
[   24.228223]  ? do_group_exit+0x39/0xb0
[   24.228695]  ? __x64_sys_exit_group+0x14/0x20
[   24.229270]  ? do_syscall_64+0x49/0x130
[   24.229762]  ? entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xa9

I see the task is killed and other process is not impacted and
no kernel crash/warning.

> 
> I think some more elaborate comment in the code would definitely be help.

Definitely will add some comments.

> 
> Btw, you probably need to wrap it under #ifdef CONFIG_IRQ_WORK.

I will check this. stackmaps.c use irq_work as well and did not have
CONFIG_IRQ_WORK. Maybe we are missing there as well.

> 
>>>> +		work = this_cpu_ptr(&send_signal_work);
>>>> +		if (work->irq_work.flags & IRQ_WORK_BUSY)
>>>> +			return -EBUSY;
>>>> +
>>>> +		work->sig = sig;
>>>> +		irq_work_queue(&work->irq_work);
>>>> +		return 0;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +
>>>> +	return group_send_sig_info(sig, SEND_SIG_PRIV, current, PIDTYPE_TGID);
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Nit: extra newline slipped in
>> Thanks. Will remove this in the next revision.
>>>
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_send_signal_proto = {
>>>> +	.func		= bpf_send_signal,
>>>> +	.gpl_only	= false,
>>>> +	.ret_type	= RET_INTEGER,
>>>> +	.arg1_type	= ARG_ANYTHING,
>>>> +};
>>>> +
>>>>    static const struct bpf_func_proto *
>>>>    tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>>    {
>>>> @@ -617,6 +669,8 @@ tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>>    	case BPF_FUNC_get_current_cgroup_id:
>>>>    		return &bpf_get_current_cgroup_id_proto;
>>>>    #endif
>>>> +	case BPF_FUNC_send_signal:
>>>> +		return &bpf_send_signal_proto;
>>>>    	default:
>>>>    		return NULL;
>>>>    	}
>>>> @@ -1343,5 +1397,18 @@ static int __init bpf_event_init(void)
>>>>    	return 0;
>>>>    }
>>>>    
>>>> +static int __init send_signal_irq_work_init(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	int cpu;
>>>> +	struct send_signal_irq_work *work;
>>>> +
>>>> +	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) {
>>>> +		work = per_cpu_ptr(&send_signal_work, cpu);
>>>> +		init_irq_work(&work->irq_work, do_bpf_send_signal);
>>>> +	}
>>>> +	return 0;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>>    fs_initcall(bpf_event_init);
>>>> +subsys_initcall(send_signal_irq_work_init);
>>>>    #endif /* CONFIG_MODULES */
>>>>
>>>
> 

  reply index

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-22  5:39 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/3] " Yonghong Song
2019-05-22  5:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/3] " Yonghong Song
2019-05-23 15:41   ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-05-23 15:58     ` Yonghong Song
2019-05-23 16:28       ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-05-23 21:07         ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2019-05-23 21:30           ` Yonghong Song
2019-05-23 23:08             ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-05-23 23:54               ` Yonghong Song
2019-05-24 21:32                 ` Daniel Borkmann
2019-05-22  5:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/3] tools/bpf: sync bpf uapi header bpf.h to tools directory Yonghong Song
2019-05-22  5:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/3] tools/bpf: add a selftest for bpf_send_signal() helper Yonghong Song
2019-05-22 18:48   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-05-22 19:38     ` Yonghong Song
2019-05-22 19:10   ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-22 19:44     ` Yonghong Song
2019-05-22 16:38 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/3] bpf: implement " Stanislav Fomichev
2019-05-22 16:43   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-05-22 17:11     ` Stanislav Fomichev

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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=bc855846-450f-bc0f-34e3-7219c95fb620@fb.com \
    --to=yhs@fb.com \
    --cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=ast@fb.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    /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

BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/0 bpf/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 bpf bpf/ https://lore.kernel.org/bpf \
		bpf@vger.kernel.org bpf@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index bpf


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.bpf


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox