Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: Move insn if/else into do_check_insn()

2025-05-05 Thread Luis Gerhorst
Eduard Zingerman  writes:

> On Thu, 2025-05-01 at 09:35 +0200, Luis Gerhorst wrote:
> 
>> +dst_reg_type = cur_regs(env)[insn->dst_reg].type;
>
> Implicitly relying on `insn == &env->prog->insnsi[env->cur_idx]`
> is weird. Still think that `insn` parameter should be dropped and
> computed inside this function instead.
>
>> +return -EINVAL;
>> +}
>> +process_bpf_exit_full:
>
> Nit: since we are refactoring I'd extract this as a function instead of goto.

Both done, thanks again for the review and testing!



Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: Move insn if/else into do_check_insn()

2025-05-01 Thread Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
On Thu, 1 May 2025 at 09:43, Luis Gerhorst  wrote:
>
> This is required to catch the errors later and fall back to a nospec if
> on a speculative path.
>
> Eliminate the regs variable as it is only used once and insn_idx is not
> modified in-between the definition and usage.
>
> Still pass insn simply to match the other check_*() functions. As Eduard
> points out [1], insn is assumed to correspond to env->insn_idx in many
> places (e.g, __check_reg_arg()).
>
> Move code into do_check_insn(), replace
> * "continue" with "return 0" after modifying insn_idx
> * "goto process_bpf_exit" with "return PROCESS_BPF_EXIT"
> * "do_print_state = " with "*do_print_state = "
>
> [1] 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/293dbe3950a782b8eb3b87b71d7a967e120191fd.ca...@gmail.com/
>
> Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst 
> Acked-by: Henriette Herzog 
> Cc: Maximilian Ott 
> Cc: Milan Stephan 
> ---

Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi 



Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/11] bpf: Move insn if/else into do_check_insn()

2025-05-01 Thread Eduard Zingerman
On Thu, 2025-05-01 at 09:35 +0200, Luis Gerhorst wrote:
> This is required to catch the errors later and fall back to a nospec if
> on a speculative path.
> 
> Eliminate the regs variable as it is only used once and insn_idx is not
> modified in-between the definition and usage.
> 
> Still pass insn simply to match the other check_*() functions. As Eduard
> points out [1], insn is assumed to correspond to env->insn_idx in many
> places (e.g, __check_reg_arg()).
> 
> Move code into do_check_insn(), replace
> * "continue" with "return 0" after modifying insn_idx
> * "goto process_bpf_exit" with "return PROCESS_BPF_EXIT"
> * "do_print_state = " with "*do_print_state = "
> 
> [1] 
> https://lore.kernel.org/all/293dbe3950a782b8eb3b87b71d7a967e120191fd.ca...@gmail.com/
> 
> Signed-off-by: Luis Gerhorst 
> Acked-by: Henriette Herzog 
> Cc: Maximilian Ott 
> Cc: Milan Stephan 
> ---

Except two notes below, I think this patch looks good.
Thank you, this is a good refactoring.

[...]

> +static int do_check_insn(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
> +  bool *do_print_state)
> +{

[...]

> + } else if (class == BPF_ST) {
> + enum bpf_reg_type dst_reg_type;
> +
> + if (BPF_MODE(insn->code) != BPF_MEM ||
> + insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0) {
> + verbose(env, "BPF_ST uses reserved fields\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + /* check src operand */
> + err = check_reg_arg(env, insn->dst_reg, SRC_OP);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + dst_reg_type = cur_regs(env)[insn->dst_reg].type;

Implicitly relying on `insn == &env->prog->insnsi[env->cur_idx]`
is weird. Still think that `insn` parameter should be dropped and
computed inside this function instead.

> +
> + /* check that memory (dst_reg + off) is writeable */
> + err = check_mem_access(env, env->insn_idx, insn->dst_reg,
> +insn->off, BPF_SIZE(insn->code),
> +BPF_WRITE, -1, false, false);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + err = save_aux_ptr_type(env, dst_reg_type, false);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + } else if (class == BPF_JMP || class == BPF_JMP32) {

[...]

> + } else if (opcode == BPF_EXIT) {
> + if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) != BPF_K ||
> + insn->imm != 0 ||
> + insn->src_reg != BPF_REG_0 ||
> + insn->dst_reg != BPF_REG_0 ||
> + class == BPF_JMP32) {
> + verbose(env, "BPF_EXIT uses reserved fields\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +process_bpf_exit_full:

Nit: since we are refactoring I'd extract this as a function instead of goto.

> + /* We must do check_reference_leak here before
> +  * prepare_func_exit to handle the case when
> +  * state->curframe > 0, it may be a callback function,
> +  * for which reference_state must match caller reference
> +  * state when it exits.
> +  */
> + err = check_resource_leak(env, exception_exit, 
> !env->cur_state->curframe,
> +   "BPF_EXIT instruction in main 
> prog");
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> +
> + /* The side effect of the prepare_func_exit which is
> +  * being skipped is that it frees bpf_func_state.
> +  * Typically, process_bpf_exit will only be hit with
> +  * outermost exit. copy_verifier_state in pop_stack will
> +  * handle freeing of any extra bpf_func_state left over
> +  * from not processing all nested function exits. We
> +  * also skip return code checks as they are not needed
> +  * for exceptional exits.
> +  */
> + if (exception_exit)
> + return PROCESS_BPF_EXIT;
> +
> + if (env->cur_state->curframe) {
> + /* exit from nested function */
> + err = prepare_func_exit(env, &env->insn_idx);
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + *do_print_state = true;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + err = check_return_code(env, BPF_REG_0, "R0");
> + if (err)
> + return err;
> + return PROCESS_BPF_EXIT;

[...]