Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/5] bpf: add dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS for test purpose
From: Martin KaFai Lau <hidden>
Date: 2021-10-20 01:23:14
Also in:
bpf
On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 08:48:04PM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
+static struct bpf_dummy_ops_test_args *
+dummy_ops_init_args(const union bpf_attr *kattr, unsigned int nr)
+{
+ __u32 size_in;
+ struct bpf_dummy_ops_test_args *args;
+ void __user *ctx_in;
+ void __user *u_state;
+
+ if (!nr || nr > MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS)
+ return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+ size_in = kattr->test.ctx_size_in;
+ if (size_in != sizeof(u64) * nr)
+ return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+ args = kzalloc(sizeof(*args), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!args)
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+
+ ctx_in = u64_to_user_ptr(kattr->test.ctx_in);
+ if (copy_from_user(args->args, ctx_in, size_in))args is leaked.
+ return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
+
+ u_state = u64_to_user_ptr(args->args[0]);
+ if (!u_state)
+ return args;
+
+ if (copy_from_user(&args->state, u_state, sizeof(args->state))) {
+ kfree(args);
+ return ERR_PTR(-EFAULT);
+ }
+
+ return args;
+}[ ... ]
+int bpf_dummy_struct_ops_test_run(struct bpf_prog *prog,
+ const union bpf_attr *kattr,
+ union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
+{
+ const struct bpf_struct_ops *st_ops = &bpf_bpf_dummy_ops;
+ const struct btf_type *func_proto = prog->aux->attach_func_proto;
+ struct bpf_dummy_ops_test_args *args = NULL;
+ struct bpf_tramp_progs *tprogs = NULL;args = NULL and tprogs = NULL are not needed.
+ void *image = NULL;
+ unsigned int op_idx;
+ int err;
+ int prog_ret;
+
+ args = dummy_ops_init_args(kattr, btf_type_vlen(func_proto));
+ if (IS_ERR(args))
+ return PTR_ERR(args);
+
+ tprogs = kcalloc(BPF_TRAMP_MAX, sizeof(*tprogs), GFP_KERNEL);
+ if (!tprogs) {
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+ goto out;
+ }
+
+ image = bpf_jit_alloc_exec(PAGE_SIZE);
+ if (!image) {
+ err = -ENOMEM;
+ goto out;
+ }
+ set_vm_flush_reset_perms(image);
+
+ op_idx = prog->expected_attach_type;
+ err = bpf_struct_ops_prepare_trampoline(tprogs, prog,
+ &st_ops->func_models[op_idx],
+ image, image + PAGE_SIZE);
+ if (err < 0)
+ goto out;
+
+ set_memory_ro((long)image, 1);
+ set_memory_x((long)image, 1);
+ prog_ret = dummy_ops_call_op(image, args);
+
+ err = dummy_ops_copy_args(args);
+ if (err)
+ goto out;
+ if (put_user(prog_ret, &uattr->test.retval))
+ err = -EFAULT;
+out:
+ kfree(args);
+ bpf_jit_free_exec(image);
+ kfree(tprogs);
+ return err;
+}
+
+static int bpf_dummy_init(struct btf *btf)
+{
+ s32 type_id;
+
+ type_id = btf_find_by_name_kind(btf, "bpf_dummy_ops_state",
+ BTF_KIND_STRUCT);
+ if (type_id < 0)
+ return -EINVAL;
+
+ dummy_ops_state = btf_type_by_id(btf, type_id);Probably just do btf_find_by_name_kind("bpf_dummy_ops_state")
in bpf_dummy_ops_btf_struct_access() during each test. There is
no need to optimize and cache it only for the testing purpose.
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static bool bpf_dummy_ops_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
+ enum bpf_access_type type,
+ const struct bpf_prog *prog,
+ struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
+{
+ return bpf_check_btf_func_ctx_access(off, size, type, prog, info);
+}
+
+static int bpf_dummy_ops_btf_struct_access(struct bpf_verifier_log *log,
+ const struct btf *btf,
+ const struct btf_type *t, int off,
+ int size, enum bpf_access_type atype,
+ u32 *next_btf_id)
+{
+ int err;
+
+ if (atype != BPF_READ && t != dummy_ops_state) {I think this can be further simplified. The only struct that the bpf_prog can access is bpf_dummy_ops_state, so the "atype != BPF_READ" test can be removed. The log message then needs to be adjusted. Others lgtm.
+ bpf_log(log, "only write to bpf_dummy_ops_state is supported\n"); + return -EACCES; + } + + err = btf_struct_access(log, btf, t, off, size, atype, next_btf_id); + if (err < 0) + return err; + + return atype == BPF_READ ? err : NOT_INIT; +}