* Issue with verifier error
@ 2021-09-16 22:15 Neal Shukla
2021-09-28 21:02 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Neal Shukla @ 2021-09-16 22:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Xdp; +Cc: Lisa Watanabe
Hi all,
We've encountered a compiler issue which leads to issues with the
verifier. We compile with clang using the O2 optimization level. When we
have a call to bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest) and attempt to load the debug version
we get a verifier error. Removing the bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest) call and
loading the debug version results in no errors, as does loading the
non-debug version of our code.
[Working code]
__u16 port_index = udp_header->dest;
__u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
debug_trace_printk(
"Failed to find tenant for port %d\n",
bpf_ntohs(port_index)
);
update_metric(&metrics_map, MISSING_TENANT + entry_metric_offset);
packet_metadata->return_action = ACTION_DROP;
return PROGRAM_RETURN_CONTINUE;
}
[Code which leads to verifier error]
__u16 port_index = bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest);
__u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
debug_trace_printk(
"Failed to find tenant for port %d\n",
port_index
);
update_metric(&metrics_map, MISSING_TENANT + entry_metric_offset);
packet_metadata->return_action = ACTION_DROP;
return PROGRAM_RETURN_CONTINUE;
}
[Verifier error]
from 346 to 424: R0=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=4,vs=524288,imm=0)
R6=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R7=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0)
R8=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=42,imm=0) R9=pkt(id=0,off=30,r=42,imm=0) R10=fp0
; __u16 port_index = bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest);
424: (69) r3 = *(u16 *)(r8 +36)
425: (dc) r3 = be16 r3
; __u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
426: (bf) r1 = r3
427: (67) r1 <<= 3
428: (0f) r0 += r1
last_idx 428 first_idx 424
regs=2 stack=0 before 427: (67) r1 <<= 3
regs=2 stack=0 before 426: (bf) r1 = r3
regs=8 stack=0 before 425: (dc) r3 = be16 r3
regs=9 stack=0 before 424: (69) r3 = *(u16 *)(r8 +36)
R0_rw=map_value(id=0,off=0,ks=4,vs=524288,imm=0)
R6=mem(id=0,ref_obj_id=0,off=0,imm=0) R7=ctx(id=0,off=0,imm=0)
R8_r=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=42,imm=0) R9_w=pkt(id=0,off=30,r=42,imm=0)
R10=fp0
parent already had regs=0 stack=0 marks
math between map_value pointer and register with unbounded min value
is not allowed
processed 585 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states
36 peak_states 36 mark_read 4
[Object dump of working code]
0000000000000d40 <LBB0_51>:
; __u16 port_index = udp_header->dest;
424: 69 83 24 00 00 00 00 00 r3 = *(u16 *)(r8 + 36)
; __u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
425: bf 31 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r3
426: 67 01 00 00 03 00 00 00 r1 <<= 3
427: 0f 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 r0 += r1
428: 79 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 0)
; if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
429: 55 01 1e 00 00 00 00 00 if r1 != 0 goto +30 <LBB0_54>
430: b7 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 r8 = 0
; debug_trace_printk(
431: 73 8a ca ff 00 00 00 00 *(u8 *)(r10 - 54) = r8
432: b7 01 00 00 64 0a 00 00 r1 = 2660
433: 6b 1a c8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u16 *)(r10 - 56) = r1
434: 18 01 00 00 72 20 70 6f 00 00 00 00 72 74 20 25 r1 =
2675266213502787698 ll
436: 7b 1a c0 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 64) = r1
437: 18 01 00 00 65 6e 61 6e 00 00 00 00 74 20 66 6f r1 =
8027139070274661989 ll
439: 7b 1a b8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 72) = r1
440: 18 01 00 00 6f 20 66 69 00 00 00 00 6e 64 20 74 r1 =
8367798533031862383 ll
442: 7b 1a b0 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 80) = r1
443: 18 01 00 00 46 61 69 6c 00 00 00 00 65 64 20 74 r1 =
8367798494427701574 ll
445: 7b 1a a8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 88) = r1
446: dc 03 00 00 10 00 00 00 r3 = be16 r3
447: bf a1 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r10
448: 07 01 00 00 a8 ff ff ff r1 += -88
449: b7 02 00 00 23 00 00 00 r2 = 35
450: 85 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 call 6
451: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; __u32 key = (__u32) metric;
452: 63 1a a8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u32 *)(r10 - 88) = r1
453: bf a2 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = r10
; debug_trace_printk(
454: 07 02 00 00 a8 ff ff ff r2 += -88
; __u64 *curr_metric = bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, &key);
455: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
457: 85 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 call 1
; if (curr_metric) {
458: 15 00 b8 01 00 00 00 00 if r0 == 0 goto +440 <LBB0_68>
459: 05 00 b4 01 00 00 00 00 goto +436 <LBB0_67>
[Object dump of code which leads to verifier error]
0000000000000d40 <LBB0_51>:
; __u16 port_index = bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest);
424: 69 83 24 00 00 00 00 00 r3 = *(u16 *)(r8 + 36)
425: dc 03 00 00 10 00 00 00 r3 = be16 r3
; __u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
426: bf 31 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r3
427: 67 01 00 00 03 00 00 00 r1 <<= 3
428: 0f 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 r0 += r1
429: 79 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 0)
; if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
430: 55 01 1d 00 00 00 00 00 if r1 != 0 goto +29 <LBB0_54>
431: b7 08 00 00 00 00 00 00 r8 = 0
; debug_trace_printk(
432: 73 8a ca ff 00 00 00 00 *(u8 *)(r10 - 54) = r8
433: b7 01 00 00 64 0a 00 00 r1 = 2660
434: 6b 1a c8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u16 *)(r10 - 56) = r1
435: 18 01 00 00 72 20 70 6f 00 00 00 00 72 74 20 25 r1 =
2675266213502787698 ll
437: 7b 1a c0 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 64) = r1
438: 18 01 00 00 65 6e 61 6e 00 00 00 00 74 20 66 6f r1 =
8027139070274661989 ll
440: 7b 1a b8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 72) = r1
441: 18 01 00 00 6f 20 66 69 00 00 00 00 6e 64 20 74 r1 =
8367798533031862383 ll
443: 7b 1a b0 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 80) = r1
444: 18 01 00 00 46 61 69 6c 00 00 00 00 65 64 20 74 r1 =
8367798494427701574 ll
446: 7b 1a a8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r10 - 88) = r1
447: bf a1 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = r10
448: 07 01 00 00 a8 ff ff ff r1 += -88
449: b7 02 00 00 23 00 00 00 r2 = 35
450: 85 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 call 6
451: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; __u32 key = (__u32) metric;
452: 63 1a a8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u32 *)(r10 - 88) = r1
453: bf a2 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = r10
; debug_trace_printk(
454: 07 02 00 00 a8 ff ff ff r2 += -88
; __u64 *curr_metric = bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, &key);
455: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
457: 85 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 call 1
; if (curr_metric) {
458: 15 00 b8 01 00 00 00 00 if r0 == 0 goto +440 <LBB0_68>
459: 05 00 b4 01 00 00 00 00 goto +436 <LBB0_67>
Based on the object dumps and the verifier error it seems the error is with
this line:
__u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
Specifically, `port_index` doesn't seem to have a minimum bound. `port_index`
is an unsigned 16 bit integer, and the maximum number of entries for the
bpf map `tenants_by_port` is 65536. This means the every __u16 value should
be a valid index within that map. For some reason, converting the endianess
before the debug statement leads to this verifier error.
If we comment out the debug statement, our verifier error disappears.
[Code with debug_trace_printk commented out]
__u16 port_index = bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest);
__u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
// debug_trace_printk(
// "Failed to find tenant for port %d\n",
// port_index
// );
update_metric(&metrics_map, MISSING_TENANT + entry_metric_offset);
packet_metadata->return_action = ACTION_DROP;
return PROGRAM_RETURN_CONTINUE;
}
[Object dump of code with debug_trace_printk commented out]
0000000000000c20 <LBB0_51>:
; __u16 port_index = bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest);
388: 69 81 24 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r8 + 36)
389: dc 01 00 00 40 00 00 00 r1 = be64 r1
; __u64 tenant_id = (*tenants_by_port)[port_index];
390: 77 01 00 00 2d 00 00 00 r1 >>= 45
391: 57 01 00 00 f8 ff 07 00 r1 &= 524280
392: 0f 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 r0 += r1
393: 79 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r0 + 0)
; if (tenant_id == INVALID_TENANT_ID) {
394: 55 01 2d 00 00 00 00 00 if r1 != 0 goto +45 <LBB0_54>
395: b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; __u32 key = (__u32) metric;
396: 63 1a a8 ff 00 00 00 00 *(u32 *)(r10 - 88) = r1
397: bf a2 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = r10
398: 07 02 00 00 a8 ff ff ff r2 += -88
; __u64 *curr_metric = bpf_map_lookup_elem(map, &key);
399: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
401: 85 00 00 00 01 00 00 00 call 1
; if (curr_metric) {
402: 15 00 21 00 00 00 00 00 if r0 == 0 goto +33 <LBB0_16>
403: 05 00 1d 00 00 00 00 00 goto +29 <LBB0_15>
Any insight into the issue would be much appreciated. Thank you!
- Neal
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: Issue with verifier error
2021-09-16 22:15 Issue with verifier error Neal Shukla
@ 2021-09-28 21:02 ` Alexei Starovoitov
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2021-09-28 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Neal Shukla; +Cc: Xdp, Lisa Watanabe
On Fri, Sep 17, 2021 at 12:18 AM Neal Shukla <nshukla@riotgames.com> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We've encountered a compiler issue which leads to issues with the
> verifier. We compile with clang using the O2 optimization level. When we
> have a call to bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest) and attempt to load the debug version
> we get a verifier error. Removing the bpf_ntohs(udp_header->dest) call and
> loading the debug version results in no errors, as does loading the
> non-debug version of our code.
...
> Any insight into the issue would be much appreciated. Thank you!
It could be related to optimizations that llvm was doing.
Could you please try the latest llvm trunk and the latest bpf-next?
Do you still see this issue?
If so, we will investigate. Pls provide full .c reproducer.
Thanks!
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2021-09-28 21:03 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-09-16 22:15 Issue with verifier error Neal Shukla
2021-09-28 21:02 ` Alexei Starovoitov
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).