Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 1/9] bpf: Introduce bpf timers.
flat view
From: Martin KaFai Lau <hidden>
Date: 2021-07-02 01:05:17
Also in:
bpf
On Thu, Jul 01, 2021 at 12:20:36PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: [ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+BPF_CALL_3(bpf_timer_set_callback, struct bpf_timer_kern *, timer, void *, callback_fn, + struct bpf_prog *, prog) +{ + struct bpf_hrtimer *t; + struct bpf_prog *prev; + int ret = 0; + + if (in_nmi()) + return -EOPNOTSUPP; + ____bpf_spin_lock(&timer->lock); /* including irqsave */ + t = timer->timer; + if (!t) { + ret = -EINVAL; + goto out; + } + if (!atomic64_read(&(t->map->usercnt))) { + /* maps with timers must be either held by user space + * or pinned in bpffs. Otherwise timer might still be + * running even when bpf prog is detached and user space + * is gone, since map_release_uref won't ever be called. + */ + ret = -EPERM; + goto out; + } + prev = t->prog; + if (prev != prog) { + if (prev) + /* Drop prev prog refcnt when swapping with new prog */ + bpf_prog_put(prev); + /* Bump prog refcnt once. Every bpf_timer_set_callback() + * can pick different callback_fn-s within the same prog. + */ + bpf_prog_inc(prog);
I think prog->aux->refcnt could be zero here when the bpf prog is making its final run and before the rcu grace section ended, so bpf_prog_inc_not_zero() should be used here.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ t->prog = prog; + } + t->callback_fn = callback_fn; +out: + ____bpf_spin_unlock(&timer->lock); /* including irqrestore */ + return ret; +} +
[ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -5837,6 +5906,8 @@ record_func_map(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_call_arg_meta *meta, func_id != BPF_FUNC_map_pop_elem && func_id != BPF_FUNC_map_peek_elem && func_id != BPF_FUNC_for_each_map_elem && + func_id != BPF_FUNC_timer_init && + func_id != BPF_FUNC_timer_set_callback &&
It seems checking the posion map_ptr_state is not needed. Is this change needed? [ ... ]
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -12584,6 +12662,46 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env) continue; } + if (insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_timer_set_callback) { + /* There is no need to do: + * aux = &env->insn_aux_data[i + delta]; + * if (bpf_map_ptr_poisoned(aux)) return -EINVAL; + * for bpf_timer_set_callback(). If the same callback_fn is shared + * by different timers in different maps the poisoned check + * will return false positive. + * + * The verifier will process callback_fn as many times as necessary + * with different maps and the register states prepared by + * set_timer_callback_state will be accurate. + * + * The following use case is valid: + * map1 is shared by prog1, prog2, prog3. + * prog1 calls bpf_timer_init for some map1 elements + * prog2 calls bpf_timer_set_callback for some map1 elements. + * Those that were not bpf_timer_init-ed will return -EINVAL. + * prog3 calls bpf_timer_start for some map1 elements. + * Those that were not both bpf_timer_init-ed and + * bpf_timer_set_callback-ed will return -EINVAL. + */ + struct bpf_insn ld_addrs[2] = { + BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_3, (long)prog),
The "prog" pointer value is used here.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ }; + + insn_buf[0] = ld_addrs[0]; + insn_buf[1] = ld_addrs[1]; + insn_buf[2] = *insn; + cnt = 3; + + new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, i + delta, insn_buf, cnt); + if (!new_prog) + return -ENOMEM; + + delta += cnt - 1; + env->prog = prog = new_prog;
After bpf_patch_insn_data(), a new prog may be allocated. Is the above old "prog" pointer value updated accordingly? I could have missed something.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ insn = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta; + goto patch_call_imm; + } + /* BPF_EMIT_CALL() assumptions in some of the map_gen_lookup * and other inlining handlers are currently limited to 64 bit * only.