Fix an inconsistency between func_states_equal() and
collect_linked_regs():
- regsafe() uses check_ids() to verify that cached and current states
have identical register id mapping.
- func_states_equal() calls regsafe() only for registers computed as
live by compute_live_registers().
- clean_live_states() is supposed to remove dead registers from cached
states, but it can skip states belonging to an iterator-based loop.
- collect_linked_regs() collects all registers sharing the same id,
ignoring the marks computed by compute_live_registers().
Linked registers are stored in the state's jump history.
- backtrack_insn() marks all linked registers for an instruction
as precise whenever one of the linked registers is precise.
The above might lead to a scenario:
- There is an instruction I with register rY known to be dead at I.
- Instruction I is reached via two paths: first A, then B.
- On path A:
- There is an id link between registers rX and rY.
- Checkpoint C is created at I.
- Linked register set {rX, rY} is saved to the jump history.
- rX is marked as precise at I, causing both rX and rY
to be marked precise at C.
- On path B:
- There is no id link between registers rX and rY,
otherwise register states are sub-states of those in C.
- Because rY is dead at I, check_ids() returns true.
- Current state is considered equal to checkpoint C,
propagate_precision() propagates spurious precision
mark for register rY along the path B.
- Depending on a program, this might hit verifier_bug()
in the backtrack_insn(), e.g. if rY ∈ [r1..r5]
and backtrack_insn() spots a function call.
The reproducer program is in the next patch.
This was hit by sched_ext scx_lavd scheduler code.
Changes in tests:
- verifier_scalar_ids.c selftests need modification to preserve
some registers as live for __msg() checks.
- exceptions_assert.c adjusted to match changes in the verifier log,
R0 is dead after conditional instruction and thus does not get
range.
- precise.c adjusted to match changes in the verifier log, register r9
is dead after comparison and it's range is not important for test.
Reported-by: Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>
Fixes: 0fb3cf6110 ("bpf: use register liveness information for func_states_equal")
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260306-linked-regs-and-propagate-precision-v1-1-18e859be570d@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
This patch implements range tracking (interval analysis) for BPF_DIV and
BPF_MOD operations when the divisor is a constant, covering both signed
and unsigned variants.
While LLVM typically optimizes integer division and modulo by constants
into multiplication and shift sequences, this optimization is less
effective for the BPF target when dealing with 64-bit arithmetic.
Currently, the verifier does not track bounds for scalar division or
modulo, treating the result as "unbounded". This leads to false positive
rejections for safe code patterns.
For example, the following code (compiled with -O2):
```c
int test(struct pt_regs *ctx) {
char buffer[6] = {1};
__u64 x = bpf_ktime_get_ns();
__u64 res = x % sizeof(buffer);
char value = buffer[res];
bpf_printk("res = %llu, val = %d", res, value);
return 0;
}
```
Generates a raw `BPF_MOD64` instruction:
```asm
; __u64 res = x % sizeof(buffer);
1: 97 00 00 00 06 00 00 00 r0 %= 0x6
; char value = buffer[res];
2: 18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0x0 ll
4: 0f 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 += r0
5: 91 14 00 00 00 00 00 00 r4 = *(s8 *)(r1 + 0x0)
```
Without this patch, the verifier fails with "math between map_value
pointer and register with unbounded min value is not allowed" because
it cannot deduce that `r0` is within [0, 5].
According to the BPF instruction set[1], the instruction's offset field
(`insn->off`) is used to distinguish between signed (`off == 1`) and
unsigned division (`off == 0`). Moreover, we also follow the BPF division
and modulo runtime behavior (semantics) to handle special cases, such as
division by zero and signed division overflow.
- UDIV: dst = (src != 0) ? (dst / src) : 0
- SDIV: dst = (src == 0) ? 0 : ((src == -1 && dst == LLONG_MIN) ? LLONG_MIN : (dst / src))
- UMOD: dst = (src != 0) ? (dst % src) : dst
- SMOD: dst = (src == 0) ? dst : ((src == -1 && dst == LLONG_MIN) ? 0: (dst s% src))
Here is the overview of the changes made in this patch (See the code comments
for more details and examples):
1. For BPF_DIV: Firstly check whether the divisor is zero. If so, set the
destination register to zero (matching runtime behavior).
For non-zero constant divisors: goto `scalar(32)?_min_max_(u|s)div` functions.
- General cases: compute the new range by dividing max_dividend and
min_dividend by the constant divisor.
- Overflow case (SIGNED_MIN / -1) in signed division: mark the result
as unbounded if the dividend is not a single number.
2. For BPF_MOD: Firstly check whether the divisor is zero. If so, leave the
destination register unchanged (matching runtime behavior).
For non-zero constant divisors: goto `scalar(32)?_min_max_(u|s)mod` functions.
- General case: For signed modulo, the result's sign matches the
dividend's sign. And the result's absolute value is strictly bounded
by `min(abs(dividend), abs(divisor) - 1)`.
- Special care is taken when the divisor is SIGNED_MIN. By casting
to unsigned before negation and subtracting 1, we avoid signed
overflow and correctly calculate the maximum possible magnitude
(`res_max_abs` in the code).
- "Small dividend" case: If the dividend is already within the possible
result range (e.g., [-2, 5] % 10), the operation is an identity
function, and the destination register remains unchanged.
3. In `scalar(32)?_min_max_(u|s)(div|mod)` functions: After updating current
range, reset other ranges and tnum to unbounded/unknown.
e.g., in `scalar_min_max_sdiv`, signed 64-bit range is updated. Then reset
unsigned 64-bit range and 32-bit range to unbounded, and tnum to unknown.
Exception: in BPF_MOD's "small dividend" case, since the result remains
unchanged, we do not reset other ranges/tnum.
4. Also updated existing selftests based on the expected BPF_DIV and
BPF_MOD behavior.
[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/bpf/standardization/instruction-set.rst
Co-developed-by: Shenghao Yuan <shenghaoyuan0928@163.com>
Signed-off-by: Shenghao Yuan <shenghaoyuan0928@163.com>
Co-developed-by: Tianci Cao <ziye@zju.edu.cn>
Signed-off-by: Tianci Cao <ziye@zju.edu.cn>
Signed-off-by: Yazhou Tang <tangyazhou518@outlook.com>
Tested-by: syzbot@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20260119085458.182221-2-tangyazhou@zju.edu.cn
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Function mark_precise_scalar_ids() is superseded by
bt_sync_linked_regs() and equal scalars tracking in jump history.
mark_precise_scalar_ids() propagates precision over registers sharing
same ID on parent/child state boundaries, while jump history records
allow bt_sync_linked_regs() to propagate same information with
instruction level granularity, which is strictly more precise.
This commit removes mark_precise_scalar_ids() and updates test cases
in progs/verifier_scalar_ids to reflect new verifier behavior.
The tests are updated in the following manner:
- mark_precise_scalar_ids() propagated precision regardless of
presence of conditional jumps, while new jump history based logic
only kicks in when conditional jumps are present.
Hence test cases are augmented with conditional jumps to still
trigger precision propagation.
- As equal scalars tracking no longer relies on parent/child state
boundaries some test cases are no longer interesting,
such test cases are removed, namely:
- precision_same_state and precision_cross_state are superseded by
linked_regs_bpf_k;
- precision_same_state_broken_link and equal_scalars_broken_link
are superseded by linked_regs_broken_link.
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240718202357.1746514-3-eddyz87@gmail.com
Use bpf_verifier_state->jmp_history to track which registers were
updated by find_equal_scalars() (renamed to collect_linked_regs())
when conditional jump was verified. Use recorded information in
backtrack_insn() to propagate precision.
E.g. for the following program:
while verifying instructions
1: r1 = r0 |
2: if r1 < 8 goto ... | push r0,r1 as linked registers in jmp_history
3: if r0 > 16 goto ... | push r0,r1 as linked registers in jmp_history
4: r2 = r10 |
5: r2 += r0 v mark_chain_precision(r0)
while doing mark_chain_precision(r0)
5: r2 += r0 | mark r0 precise
4: r2 = r10 |
3: if r0 > 16 goto ... | mark r0,r1 as precise
2: if r1 < 8 goto ... | mark r0,r1 as precise
1: r1 = r0 v
Technically, do this as follows:
- Use 10 bits to identify each register that gains range because of
sync_linked_regs():
- 3 bits for frame number;
- 6 bits for register or stack slot number;
- 1 bit to indicate if register is spilled.
- Use u64 as a vector of 6 such records + 4 bits for vector length.
- Augment struct bpf_jmp_history_entry with a field 'linked_regs'
representing such vector.
- When doing check_cond_jmp_op() remember up to 6 registers that
gain range because of sync_linked_regs() in such a vector.
- Don't propagate range information and reset IDs for registers that
don't fit in 6-value vector.
- Push a pair {instruction index, linked registers vector}
to bpf_verifier_state->jmp_history.
- When doing backtrack_insn() check if any of recorded linked
registers is currently marked precise, if so mark all linked
registers as precise.
This also requires fixes for two test_verifier tests:
- precise: test 1
- precise: test 2
Both tests contain the following instruction sequence:
19: (bf) r2 = r9 ; R2=scalar(id=3) R9=scalar(id=3)
20: (a5) if r2 < 0x8 goto pc+1 ; R2=scalar(id=3,umin=8)
21: (95) exit
22: (07) r2 += 1 ; R2_w=scalar(id=3+1,...)
23: (bf) r1 = r10 ; R1_w=fp0 R10=fp0
24: (07) r1 += -8 ; R1_w=fp-8
25: (b7) r3 = 0 ; R3_w=0
26: (85) call bpf_probe_read_kernel#113
The call to bpf_probe_read_kernel() at (26) forces r2 to be precise.
Previously, this forced all registers with same id to become precise
immediately when mark_chain_precision() is called.
After this change, the precision is propagated to registers sharing
same id only when 'if' instruction is backtracked.
Hence verification log for both tests is changed:
regs=r2,r9 -> regs=r2 for instructions 25..20.
Fixes: 904e6ddf41 ("bpf: Use scalar ids in mark_chain_precision()")
Reported-by: Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>
Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240718202357.1746514-2-eddyz87@gmail.com
Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAEf4BzZ0xidVCqB47XnkXcNhkPWF6_nTV7yt+_Lf0kcFEut2Mg@mail.gmail.com/
Compilers can generate the code
r1 = r2
r1 += 0x1
if r2 < 1000 goto ...
use knowledge of r2 range in subsequent r1 operations
So remember constant delta between r2 and r1 and update r1 after 'if' condition.
Unfortunately LLVM still uses this pattern for loops with 'can_loop' construct:
for (i = 0; i < 1000 && can_loop; i++)
The "undo" pass was introduced in LLVM
https://reviews.llvm.org/D121937
to prevent this optimization, but it cannot cover all cases.
Instead of fighting middle end optimizer in BPF backend teach the verifier
about this pattern.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240613013815.953-3-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Currently, when a scalar bounded register is spilled to the stack, its
ID is preserved, but only if was already assigned, i.e. if this register
was MOVed before.
Assign an ID on spill if none is set, so that equal scalars could be
tracked if a register is spilled to the stack and filled into another
register.
One test is adjusted to reflect the change in register IDs.
Signed-off-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maxim@isovalent.com>
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240108205209.838365-9-maxtram95@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use instruction (jump) history to record instructions that performed
register spill/fill to/from stack, regardless if this was done through
read-only r10 register, or any other register after copying r10 into it
*and* potentially adjusting offset.
To make this work reliably, we push extra per-instruction flags into
instruction history, encoding stack slot index (spi) and stack frame
number in extra 10 bit flags we take away from prev_idx in instruction
history. We don't touch idx field for maximum performance, as it's
checked most frequently during backtracking.
This change removes basically the last remaining practical limitation of
precision backtracking logic in BPF verifier. It fixes known
deficiencies, but also opens up new opportunities to reduce number of
verified states, explored in the subsequent patches.
There are only three differences in selftests' BPF object files
according to veristat, all in the positive direction (less states).
File Program Insns (A) Insns (B) Insns (DIFF) States (A) States (B) States (DIFF)
-------------------------------------- ------------- --------- --------- ------------- ---------- ---------- -------------
test_cls_redirect_dynptr.bpf.linked3.o cls_redirect 2987 2864 -123 (-4.12%) 240 231 -9 (-3.75%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_tc 82848 82661 -187 (-0.23%) 5107 5073 -34 (-0.67%)
xdp_synproxy_kern.bpf.linked3.o syncookie_xdp 85116 84964 -152 (-0.18%) 5162 5130 -32 (-0.62%)
Note, I avoided renaming jmp_history to more generic insn_hist to
minimize number of lines changed and potential merge conflicts between
bpf and bpf-next trees.
Notice also cur_hist_entry pointer reset to NULL at the beginning of
instruction verification loop. This pointer avoids the problem of
relying on last jump history entry's insn_idx to determine whether we
already have entry for current instruction or not. It can happen that we
added jump history entry because current instruction is_jmp_point(), but
also we need to add instruction flags for stack access. In this case, we
don't want to entries, so we need to reuse last added entry, if it is
present.
Relying on insn_idx comparison has the same ambiguity problem as the one
that was fixed recently in [0], so we avoid that.
[0] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/20231110002638.4168352-3-andrii@kernel.org/
Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Reported-by: Tao Lyu <tao.lyu@epfl.ch>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231205184248.1502704-2-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Change mark_chain_precision() to track precision in situations
like below:
r2 = unknown value
...
--- state #0 ---
...
r1 = r2 // r1 and r2 now share the same ID
...
--- state #1 {r1.id = A, r2.id = A} ---
...
if (r2 > 10) goto exit; // find_equal_scalars() assigns range to r1
...
--- state #2 {r1.id = A, r2.id = A} ---
r3 = r10
r3 += r1 // need to mark both r1 and r2
At the beginning of the processing of each state, ensure that if a
register with a scalar ID is marked as precise, all registers sharing
this ID are also marked as precise.
This property would be used by a follow-up change in regsafe().
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230613153824.3324830-2-eddyz87@gmail.com
When precision backtracking bails out due to some unsupported sequence
of instructions (e.g., stack access through register other than r10), we
need to mark all SCALAR registers as precise to be safe. Currently,
though, we mark SCALARs precise only starting from the state we detected
unsupported condition, which could be one of the parent states of the
actual current state. This will leave some registers potentially not
marked as precise, even though they should. So make sure we start
marking scalars as precise from current state (env->cur_state).
Further, we don't currently detect a situation when we end up with some
stack slots marked as needing precision, but we ran out of available
states to find the instructions that populate those stack slots. This is
akin the `i >= func->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE` check and should be
handled similarly by falling back to marking all SCALARs precise. Add
this check when we run out of states.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230505043317.3629845-8-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Teach __mark_chain_precision logic to maintain register/stack masks
across all active frames when going from child state to parent state.
Currently this should be mostly no-op, as precision backtracking usually
bails out when encountering subprog entry/exit.
It's not very apparent from the diff due to increased indentation, but
the logic remains the same, except everything is done on specific `fr`
frame index. Calls to bt_clear_reg() and bt_clear_slot() are replaced
with frame-specific bt_clear_frame_reg() and bt_clear_frame_slot(),
where frame index is passed explicitly, instead of using current frame
number.
We also adjust logging to emit affected frame number. And we also add
better logging of human-readable register and stack slot masks, similar
to previous patch.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230505043317.3629845-6-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Add helper to format register and stack masks in more human-readable
format. Adjust logging a bit during backtrack propagation and especially
during forcing precision fallback logic to make it clearer what's going
on (with log_level=2, of course), and also start reporting affected
frame depth. This is in preparation for having more than one active
frame later when precision propagation between subprog calls is added.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230505043317.3629845-5-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Add a test case to check for precision marking of safe paths. Ensure
that the verifier will not prematurely prune scalars contributing to
registers needing precision.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Add a test to ensure we do mark_chain_precision for the argument type
ARG_CONST_ALLOC_SIZE_OR_ZERO. For other argument types, this was already
done, but propagation for missing for this case. Without the fix, this
test case loads successfully.
Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220823185500.467-1-memxor@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
In particular these include:
1) Remove output of inv for scalars in print_verifier_state
2) Replace inv with scalar in verifier error messages
3) Remove _value suffixes for umin/umax/s32_min/etc (except map_value)
4) Remove output of id=0
5) Remove output of ref_obj_id=0
Signed-off-by: Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220301222745.1667206-1-mykolal@fb.com
Add two tests to check that stack slot marking during backtracking
doesn't trigger 'spi > allocated_stack' warning.
One test is using BPF_ST insn. Another is using BPF_STX.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Copy-paste of existing test
"calls: cross frame pruning - liveness propagation"
but ran with different parentage chain heuristic
which stresses different path in precision tracking logic.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Use BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ flag to check that precision
tracking works as expected by comparing every step it takes.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
