From patchwork Mon Jan 8 20:52:09 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Maxim Mikityanskiy X-Patchwork-Id: 760967 Received: from mail-ed1-f50.google.com (mail-ed1-f50.google.com [209.85.208.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A9B2855E51; Mon, 8 Jan 2024 20:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Nky5uTea" Received: by mail-ed1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-555144cd330so2767010a12.2; Mon, 08 Jan 2024 12:53:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1704747222; x=1705352022; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=e9DLq0TfwWAUMCpLHR20MyJFlzT+sTpZ6i+Jf0NPu6s=; b=Nky5uTeapyrVhcyd9lMbwTt32+PcLyKBrRfZFfMKmxh9qFjF57rgbFVz9XbSRw1q/2 oip1fk+7WW3XTirSJeSEiLrEnV0h/cZSJgmdtLgVJMz7Lwcz/K5CsJuI0E51Xi6uJs5Y K7t0vzGqu6WrbDbpk+2M8EOjp4M3fjYXwodOgOKkXfl4CX3tpKMEiCxU8ars1xZQw0BY al9mpBa9rlnhpjtCVf0vD/BjCC/OhR3b8joRtrzHkXQBxC1IezUGZgm4Sp4XYaB5Am/R pGXmaiITuUSwRHyY4SDPxN9dnvxojOrQuPtGAxp+hJVJHBLxYatyBKOPXsOGYZyL3NB+ qXsA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1704747222; x=1705352022; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=e9DLq0TfwWAUMCpLHR20MyJFlzT+sTpZ6i+Jf0NPu6s=; b=PUDGmdM/5WfdPP2XDPEGMVXa+wVd0AUJ1g6k5dX2x+pXsffDv663BaYanDeaXshDrR RTIsJ0IGFpt1kOrhj2UmsvId7iW0iLpIlJpfEevNYyk7HsxRSKSk3+iqdBThN5HTZREJ uAbzOUmILZG2O/7BefAWntp4fdG2HKgd/SAhrL9rtk6EwSPjmTMyi0xAXuCe95eOkI7V 89uF4MwrA0Bp0d9aGuXTQVfu49uVxY9WZchgqF2DvuCuaxJ4NJzQStGGN08eWBnolYnj uSqHqLSE6AgH9biIeqg7aBM1hjpo2uLbZ/IY2kti/N2W7DEzdIMTCx3q38c64QggDVyf lPSw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy/fj5+EzXlhzMw45ua6jUCp89hfrXIZhi0Sy2b7WcBAlczD4x7 WBM2SSXThfSC0Atlf813/hU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHQ6/x0HVJ35HtD6Bjguw9MNx1mMJnNOgHd39sQ8neRKxkGKl8TzgyNleGUq342qGc3ggzm1g== X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d6da:0:b0:556:a28e:7cc1 with SMTP id x26-20020aa7d6da000000b00556a28e7cc1mr2212161edr.81.1704747221648; Mon, 08 Jan 2024 12:53:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([185.220.101.80]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id fi23-20020a056402551700b005579dbd7c4csm203899edb.35.2024.01.08.12.53.40 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 08 Jan 2024 12:53:41 -0800 (PST) From: Maxim Mikityanskiy To: Eduard Zingerman , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Shung-Hsi Yu Cc: John Fastabend , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , KP Singh , Stanislav Fomichev , Hao Luo , Jiri Olsa , Mykola Lysenko , Shuah Khan , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/15] selftests/bpf: states pruning checks for scalar vs STACK_{MISC,ZERO} Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 22:52:09 +0200 Message-ID: <20240108205209.838365-16-maxtram95@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.43.0 In-Reply-To: <20240108205209.838365-1-maxtram95@gmail.com> References: <20240108205209.838365-1-maxtram95@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Eduard Zingerman Check that stacksafe() considers the following old vs cur stack spill state combinations equivalent: - spill of unbound scalar vs combination of STACK_{MISC,ZERO,INVALID} - STACK_MISC vs spill of unbound scalar - spill of scalar 0 vs STACK_ZERO - STACK_ZERO vs spill of scalar 0 Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman --- .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c | 192 ++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 192 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c index 3764111d190d..3cd3fe30357f 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_spill_fill.c @@ -1044,4 +1044,196 @@ l0_%=: r1 >>= 32; \ : __clobber_all); } +/* stacksafe(): check if spill of unbound scalar in old state is + * considered equivalent to any state of the spill in the current state. + * + * On the first verification path an unbound scalar is written for + * fp-8 and later marked precise. + * On the second verification path a mix of STACK_MISC/ZERO/INVALID is + * written to fp-8. These should be considered equivalent. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("10: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)") +__msg("10: safe") +__msg("processed 16 insns") +__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ) +__naked void old_unbound_scalar_vs_cur_anything(void) +{ + asm volatile( + /* get a random value for branching */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "r7 = r0;" + /* get a random value for storing at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "if r7 == 0 goto 1f;" + /* unbound scalar written to fp-8 */ + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "goto 2f;" +"1:" + /* mark fp-8 as mix of STACK_MISC/ZERO/INVALID */ + "r1 = 0;" + "*(u8*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "*(u8*)(r10 - 7) = r1;" + /* fp-2..fp-6 remain STACK_INVALID */ + "*(u8*)(r10 - 1) = r0;" +"2:" + /* read fp-8 and force it precise, should be considered safe + * on second visit + */ + "r0 = *(u64*)(r10 - 8);" + "r0 &= 0xff;" + "r1 = r10;" + "r1 += r0;" + "exit;" + : + : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns) + : __clobber_all); +} + +/* stacksafe(): check if STACK_MISC in old state is considered + * equivalent to stack spill of unbound scalar in cur state. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("8: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8) ; R0_w=scalar(id=1) R10=fp0 fp-8=scalar(id=1)") +__msg("8: safe") +__msg("processed 11 insns") +__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ) +__naked void old_unbound_scalar_vs_cur_stack_misc(void) +{ + asm volatile( + /* get a random value for branching */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "if r0 == 0 goto 1f;" + /* conjure unbound scalar at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "goto 2f;" +"1:" + /* conjure STACK_MISC at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "*(u32*)(r10 - 4) = r0;" +"2:" + /* read fp-8, should be considered safe on second visit */ + "r0 = *(u64*)(r10 - 8);" + "exit;" + : + : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns) + : __clobber_all); +} + +/* stacksafe(): check if stack spill of unbound scalar in old state is + * considered equivalent to STACK_MISC in cur state. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("8: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8) ; R0_w=scalar() R10=fp0 fp-8=mmmmmmmm") +__msg("8: safe") +__msg("processed 11 insns") +__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ) +__naked void old_stack_misc_vs_cur_unbound_scalar(void) +{ + asm volatile( + /* get a random value for branching */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "if r0 == 0 goto 1f;" + /* conjure STACK_MISC at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "*(u32*)(r10 - 4) = r0;" + "goto 2f;" +"1:" + /* conjure unbound scalar at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" +"2:" + /* read fp-8, should be considered safe on second visit */ + "r0 = *(u64*)(r10 - 8);" + "exit;" + : + : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns) + : __clobber_all); +} + +/* stacksafe(): check if spill of register with value 0 in old state + * is considered equivalent to STACK_ZERO. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("9: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)") +__msg("9: safe") +__msg("processed 15 insns") +__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ) +__naked void old_spill_zero_vs_stack_zero(void) +{ + asm volatile( + /* get a random value for branching */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "r7 = r0;" + /* get a random value for storing at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "if r7 == 0 goto 1f;" + /* conjure spilled register with value 0 at fp-8 */ + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "if r0 != 0 goto 3f;" + "goto 2f;" +"1:" + /* conjure STACK_ZERO at fp-8 */ + "r1 = 0;" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r1;" +"2:" + /* read fp-8 and force it precise, should be considered safe + * on second visit + */ + "r0 = *(u64*)(r10 - 8);" + "r1 = r10;" + "r1 += r0;" +"3:" + "exit;" + : + : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns) + : __clobber_all); +} + +/* stacksafe(): similar to old_spill_zero_vs_stack_zero() but the + * other way around: check if STACK_ZERO is considered equivalent to + * spill of register with value 0. + */ +SEC("socket") +__success __log_level(2) +__msg("8: (79) r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)") +__msg("8: safe") +__msg("processed 14 insns") +__flag(BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ) +__naked void old_stack_zero_vs_spill_zero(void) +{ + asm volatile( + /* get a random value for branching */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "if r0 == 0 goto 1f;" + /* conjure STACK_ZERO at fp-8 */ + "r1 = 0;" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r1;" + "goto 2f;" +"1:" + /* conjure spilled register with value 0 at fp-8 */ + "call %[bpf_ktime_get_ns];" + "*(u64*)(r10 - 8) = r0;" + "if r0 != 0 goto 3f;" +"2:" + /* read fp-8 and force it precise, should be considered safe + * on second visit + */ + "r0 = *(u64*)(r10 - 8);" + "r1 = r10;" + "r1 += r0;" +"3:" + "exit;" + : + : __imm(bpf_ktime_get_ns) + : __clobber_all); +} + char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";