diff mbox series

[v5] bpf: fix bpf_probe_read_kernel prototype mismatch

Message ID 20230801111449.185301-1-arnd@kernel.org (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit 6a5a148aaf14747570cc634f9cdfcb0393f5617f
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series [v5] bpf: fix bpf_probe_read_kernel prototype mismatch | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/tree_selection success Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply, async
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 fail Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 fail Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-PR fail merge-conflict
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-3 pending Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-VM_Test-6 success Logs for set-matrix

Commit Message

Arnd Bergmann Aug. 1, 2023, 11:13 a.m. UTC 
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

bpf_probe_read_kernel() has a __weak definition in core.c and another
definition with an incompatible prototype in kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c,
when CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is enabled.

Since the two are incompatible, there cannot be a shared declaration in
a header file, but the lack of a prototype causes a W=1 warning:

kernel/bpf/core.c:1638:12: error: no previous prototype for 'bpf_probe_read_kernel' [-Werror=missing-prototypes]

On 32-bit architectures, the local prototype

u64 __weak bpf_probe_read_kernel(void *dst, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr)

passes arguments in other registers as the one in bpf_trace.c

BPF_CALL_3(bpf_probe_read_kernel, void *, dst, u32, size,
            const void *, unsafe_ptr)

which uses 64-bit arguments in pairs of registers.

As both versions of the function are fairly simple and only really
differ in one line, just move them into a header file as an inline
function that does not add any overhead for the bpf_trace.c callers
and actually avoids a function call for the other one.

Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ac25cb0f-b804-1649-3afb-1dc6138c2716@iogearbox.net/
Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
--
v5: rebase on top of 1f9a1ea821ff2 ("bpf: Support new sign-extension load insns")
v4: rewrite again to use a shared inline helper
v3: clarify changelog text further.
v2: rewrite completely to fix the mismatch.
---
 include/linux/bpf.h      | 12 ++++++++++++
 kernel/bpf/core.c        | 12 +++---------
 kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 11 -----------
 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)

Comments

Yonghong Song Aug. 1, 2023, 2:41 p.m. UTC | #1 
On 8/1/23 4:13 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> bpf_probe_read_kernel() has a __weak definition in core.c and another
> definition with an incompatible prototype in kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c,
> when CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is enabled.
> 
> Since the two are incompatible, there cannot be a shared declaration in
> a header file, but the lack of a prototype causes a W=1 warning:
> 
> kernel/bpf/core.c:1638:12: error: no previous prototype for 'bpf_probe_read_kernel' [-Werror=missing-prototypes]
> 
> On 32-bit architectures, the local prototype
> 
> u64 __weak bpf_probe_read_kernel(void *dst, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr)
> 
> passes arguments in other registers as the one in bpf_trace.c
> 
> BPF_CALL_3(bpf_probe_read_kernel, void *, dst, u32, size,
>              const void *, unsafe_ptr)
> 
> which uses 64-bit arguments in pairs of registers.
> 
> As both versions of the function are fairly simple and only really
> differ in one line, just move them into a header file as an inline
> function that does not add any overhead for the bpf_trace.c callers
> and actually avoids a function call for the other one.
> 
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/ac25cb0f-b804-1649-3afb-1dc6138c2716@iogearbox.net/
> Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org Aug. 2, 2023, 9:20 p.m. UTC | #2 
Hello:

This patch was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>:

On Tue,  1 Aug 2023 13:13:58 +0200 you wrote:
> From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
> 
> bpf_probe_read_kernel() has a __weak definition in core.c and another
> definition with an incompatible prototype in kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c,
> when CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is enabled.
> 
> Since the two are incompatible, there cannot be a shared declaration in
> a header file, but the lack of a prototype causes a W=1 warning:
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [v5] bpf: fix bpf_probe_read_kernel prototype mismatch
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/6a5a148aaf14

You are awesome, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index ceaa8c23287fc..abe75063630b8 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -2661,6 +2661,18 @@  static inline void bpf_dynptr_set_rdonly(struct bpf_dynptr_kern *ptr)
 }
 #endif /* CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL */
 
+static __always_inline int
+bpf_probe_read_kernel_common(void *dst, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr)
+{
+	int ret = -EFAULT;
+
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS))
+		ret = copy_from_kernel_nofault(dst, unsafe_ptr, size);
+	if (unlikely(ret < 0))
+		memset(dst, 0, size);
+	return ret;
+}
+
 void __bpf_free_used_btfs(struct bpf_prog_aux *aux,
 			  struct btf_mod_pair *used_btfs, u32 len);
 
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index 245402e2229da..52b2a01d74721 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -1649,12 +1649,6 @@  bool bpf_opcode_in_insntable(u8 code)
 }
 
 #ifndef CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON
-u64 __weak bpf_probe_read_kernel(void *dst, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr)
-{
-	memset(dst, 0, size);
-	return -EFAULT;
-}
-
 /**
  *	___bpf_prog_run - run eBPF program on a given context
  *	@regs: is the array of MAX_BPF_EXT_REG eBPF pseudo-registers
@@ -2065,8 +2059,8 @@  static u64 ___bpf_prog_run(u64 *regs, const struct bpf_insn *insn)
 		DST = *(SIZE *)(unsigned long) (SRC + insn->off);	\
 		CONT;							\
 	LDX_PROBE_MEM_##SIZEOP:						\
-		bpf_probe_read_kernel(&DST, sizeof(SIZE),		\
-				      (const void *)(long) (SRC + insn->off));	\
+		bpf_probe_read_kernel_common(&DST, sizeof(SIZE),	\
+			      (const void *)(long) (SRC + insn->off));	\
 		DST = *((SIZE *)&DST);					\
 		CONT;
 
@@ -2081,7 +2075,7 @@  static u64 ___bpf_prog_run(u64 *regs, const struct bpf_insn *insn)
 		DST = *(SIZE *)(unsigned long) (SRC + insn->off);	\
 		CONT;							\
 	LDX_PROBE_MEMSX_##SIZEOP:					\
-		bpf_probe_read_kernel(&DST, sizeof(SIZE),		\
+		bpf_probe_read_kernel_common(&DST, sizeof(SIZE),		\
 				      (const void *)(long) (SRC + insn->off));	\
 		DST = *((SIZE *)&DST);					\
 		CONT;
diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index 79719979a6355..d6296d51a826a 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -223,17 +223,6 @@  const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_probe_read_user_str_proto = {
 	.arg3_type	= ARG_ANYTHING,
 };
 
-static __always_inline int
-bpf_probe_read_kernel_common(void *dst, u32 size, const void *unsafe_ptr)
-{
-	int ret;
-
-	ret = copy_from_kernel_nofault(dst, unsafe_ptr, size);
-	if (unlikely(ret < 0))
-		memset(dst, 0, size);
-	return ret;
-}
-
 BPF_CALL_3(bpf_probe_read_kernel, void *, dst, u32, size,
 	   const void *, unsafe_ptr)
 {