From patchwork Thu Jun 16 16:20:36 2022 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Jakub Sitnicki X-Patchwork-Id: 12884429 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86154CCA47A for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 16:20:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1377698AbiFPQUo (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 12:20:44 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56338 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1377204AbiFPQUm (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 12:20:42 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62a.google.com (mail-ej1-x62a.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 46538433B0 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 09:20:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62a.google.com with SMTP id h23so3696543ejj.12 for ; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 09:20:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cloudflare.com; s=google; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Uw4PLtWEGLGfOE/kAMpGlLOZBa3VwDABOgWaEtWdyws=; b=k9Vb9ToXK168Qp5ZJmTfuDDTg2Al5zx7Kqot0OjrjmomMqCgs0+yEB9dXtvR1Rg+VP 9DjJcrHQhIOpx71PbWdILNdI6mKP4pdG8XDxSX3waeIXlDZ05AlqTRqkehtJadzKVxtG xQg3iZr2onSlHvmDr4C0zw4LGRsS6f8ufER/g= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Uw4PLtWEGLGfOE/kAMpGlLOZBa3VwDABOgWaEtWdyws=; b=qMCrb6YB+uIbw8ezNkZceeIVOwearFObLGYjCHPpwFO1cVhKu96Qo7xVbRVjR/3vXT ELw4y/l8kTphvbXWBQiczQGdyeueWvUnQZ0dMLeGf88WpC4ENKYAWEscQDZL7YP0DukM aJdykoaT/pt3E9CzG97DN0MC2oGm/UNyQJbyRTz0kj9pMpcX6usIuSsf5Fx/jCOxTeso xt5uu2BvAG3TM2xaAzJt7xCaYqK2iRXhvitl8AGsohSfEzrBAhoUQr55JP/xeBm+K8K8 +fqTofQ1x7Qi3E/v9htkTqHEjy8+Nwzyi4gBKPw1Ldw8UykVClAVgBHxANuays4bDE9L 2E3A== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora9p88ggbEeLMAsVt+DKrVMOeZwjEQdZmxCw829VGlpFJ7j7/Drq Hxkl1lnKKiN1p8NfCmWUNXkx4Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tPWLR8rppdBEPKe/z3lmUEKWr6PcmnyVnoRvzjx5xDxsj+28U1hHe5FknvKAuXqmZNVwEc7A== X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:6e0f:b0:706:9a4f:2f3d with SMTP id sd15-20020a1709076e0f00b007069a4f2f3dmr5202919ejc.413.1655396439534; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 09:20:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from cloudflare.com (79.184.138.130.ipv4.supernova.orange.pl. [79.184.138.130]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w9-20020a170906b18900b006fec27575f1sm956935ejy.123.2022.06.16.09.20.38 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 09:20:39 -0700 (PDT) From: Jakub Sitnicki To: bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Maciej Fijalkowski , kernel-team@cloudflare.com Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf, x86: Fix tail call count offset calculation on bpf2bpf call Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 18:20:36 +0200 Message-Id: <20220616162037.535469-2-jakub@cloudflare.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.35.3 In-Reply-To: <20220616162037.535469-1-jakub@cloudflare.com> References: <20220616162037.535469-1-jakub@cloudflare.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net On x86-64 the tail call count is passed from one BPF function to another through %rax. Additionally, on function entry, the tail call count value is stored on stack right after the BPF program stack, due to register shortage. The stored count is later loaded from stack either when performing a tail call - to check if we have not reached the tail call limit - or before calling another BPF function call in order to pass it via %rax. In the latter case, we miscalculate the offset at which the tail call count was stored on function entry. The JIT does not take into account that the allocated BPF program stack is always a multiple of 8 on x86, while the actual stack depth does not have to be. This leads to a load from an offset that belongs to the BPF stack, as shown in the example below: SEC("tc") int entry(struct __sk_buff *skb) { /* Have data on stack which size is not a multiple of 8 */ volatile char arr[1] = {}; return subprog_tail(skb); } int entry(struct __sk_buff * skb): 0: (b4) w2 = 0 1: (73) *(u8 *)(r10 -1) = r2 2: (85) call pc+1#bpf_prog_ce2f79bb5f3e06dd_F 3: (95) exit int entry(struct __sk_buff * skb): 0xffffffffa0201788: nop DWORD PTR [rax+rax*1+0x0] 0xffffffffa020178d: xor eax,eax 0xffffffffa020178f: push rbp 0xffffffffa0201790: mov rbp,rsp 0xffffffffa0201793: sub rsp,0x8 0xffffffffa020179a: push rax 0xffffffffa020179b: xor esi,esi 0xffffffffa020179d: mov BYTE PTR [rbp-0x1],sil 0xffffffffa02017a1: mov rax,QWORD PTR [rbp-0x9] !!! tail call count 0xffffffffa02017a8: call 0xffffffffa02017d8 !!! is at rbp-0x10 0xffffffffa02017ad: leave 0xffffffffa02017ae: ret Fix it by rounding up the BPF stack depth to a multiple of 8, when calculating the tail call count offset on stack. Fixes: ebf7d1f508a7 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall handling in JIT") Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki --- arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c index f298b18a9a3d..c98b8c0ed3b8 100644 --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c @@ -1420,8 +1420,9 @@ st: if (is_imm8(insn->off)) case BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL: func = (u8 *) __bpf_call_base + imm32; if (tail_call_reachable) { + /* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */ EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85, - -(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth + 8)); + -round_up(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth, 8) - 8); if (!imm32 || emit_call(&prog, func, image + addrs[i - 1] + 7)) return -EINVAL; } else {