On ARM64 with CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, CFI warnings can be triggered by running
the bpf selftests. This is because the JIT doesn't emit proper CFI prologues
for BPF programs, callbacks, and struct_ops trampolines.
Example Warning:
CFI failure at bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4 (target: bpf_prog_fb8b097ab47d164a_less+0x0/0x98; expected type: 0x9e4709a9)
WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1488 at bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4
Modules linked in: bpf_testmod(OE) virtio_net net_failover failover aes_ce_blk aes_ce_cipher ghash_ce sha2_ce sha256_arm64 sha1_ce virtio_mmio uio_pdrv_genirq uio dm_mod dax configfs [last unloaded: bpf_testmod(OE)]
CPU: 0 PID: 1488 Comm: new_name Tainted: P OE 6.8.0-rc1+ #1
Hardware name: linux,dummy-virt (DT)
pstate: 204000c5 (nzCv daIF +PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4
lr : bpf_prog_234260f1d6227155_rbtree_first_and_remove+0x218/0x438
sp : ffff80008444bb10
x29: ffff80008444bb10 x28: ffff80008444bbf0 x27: ffff80008444bb60
x26: 0000000000000000 x25: 0000000000000010 x24: 0000000000000008
x23: 0000000000000001 x22: ffff00000ab71658 x21: ffff8000843dd5fc
x20: ffff00000ab459f0 x19: ffff00000ab71358 x18: 0000000000000000
x17: 000000009e4709a9 x16: 00000000d4202000 x15: 0000aaaadf15e420
x14: 0000000000004007 x13: ffff800084448000 x12: 0000000000000000
x11: dead00000000eb9f x10: ffff00000ab71370 x9 : 0000000000000000
x8 : ffff00000ab71658 x7 : 0000000000000000 x6 : 0000000000000000
x5 : 0000000000000001 x4 : 0000000000000000 x3 : 0000000000000000
x2 : 0000000000000000 x1 : ffff00000ab71658 x0 : ffff00000ab71358
Call trace:
bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4
bpf_prog_234260f1d6227155_rbtree_first_and_remove+0x218/0x438
bpf_test_run+0x190/0x358
bpf_prog_test_run_skb+0x354/0x460
bpf_prog_test_run+0x128/0x164
__sys_bpf+0x364/0x428
__arm64_sys_bpf+0x30/0x44
invoke_syscall+0x64/0x128
el0_svc_common+0xb4/0xe8
do_el0_svc+0x28/0x34
el0_svc+0x58/0x108
el0t_64_sync_handler+0x90/0xfc
el0t_64_sync+0x1a8/0x1ac
irq event stamp: 35493817
hardirqs last enabled at (35493816): [<ffff8000802e4268>] unit_alloc+0x110/0x1b0
hardirqs last disabled at (35493817): [<ffff8000802ad35c>] bpf_spin_lock+0x2c/0xec
softirqs last enabled at (35493688): [<ffff800080275934>] bpf_ksym_add+0x164/0x184
softirqs last disabled at (35493810): [<ffff800080cd9ac8>] local_bh_disable+0x4/0x30
---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---
This patch fixes the prologue and trampoline generation code to emit the
KCFI hash before the expected branch targets. The KCFI hashes are generated
at compile time and are unique to function prototypes. To allow the JIT to
find these hashes at runtime, the following behaviour of the compiler is used:
Two function prototypes are declared, one for BPF programs and another for callbacks:
extern unsigned int __bpf_prog_runX(const void *ctx, const struct bpf_insn *insn);
extern u64 __bpf_callback_fn(u64, u64, u64, u64, u64);
We force a reference to these external symbols:
__ADDRESSABLE(__bpf_prog_runX);
__ADDRESSABLE(__bpf_callback_fn);
This makes the compiler add the following two symbols with the hashes in
the symbol table:
00000000d9421881 0 NOTYPE WEAK DEFAULT ABS __kcfi_typeid___bpf_prog_runX
000000009e4709a9 0 NOTYPE WEAK DEFAULT ABS __kcfi_typeid___bpf_callback_fn
The JIT can now use the above symbols to emit the hashes in the prologues of
the programs and callbacks.
For struct_ops trampoline, the bpf_struct_ops_prepare_trampoline() function
receives a stub function that would have the hash at (function - 4). The
bpf_struct_ops_prepare_trampoline() sets `flags = BPF_TRAMP_F_INDIRECT;`
which tells prepare_trampoline() to find the hash before the stub function
and emit it in the struct_ops trampoline.
Running the selftests causes no CFI warnings:
---------------------------------------------
test_progs: Summary: 454/3613 PASSED, 62 SKIPPED, 74 FAILED
test_tag: OK (40945 tests)
test_verifier: Summary: 789 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
ARM64 Doesn't support DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_CALL_OPS when CFI_CLANG is
enabled. This causes all tests that attach fentry to kernel functions to fail.
While running the selftests, I saw some CFI warnings which were related to
static calls. Josh Poimboeuf had sent a patch series[1] last year that includes
a patch to fix this issue. I forward ported those patches and rebased my patch
on that series. You can find the tree here[2]. With this tree there are
zero CFI warnings.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/
[2] https://github.com/puranjaymohan/linux/tree/kcfi_bpf
Puranjay Mohan (1):
arm64/cfi,bpf: Support kCFI + BPF on arm64
arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h | 23 ++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 26 ++++++++++++----
3 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h
--
2.40.1
Currently, bpf_dispatcher_*_func() is marked with `__nocfi` therefore
calling BPF programs from this interface doesn't cause CFI warnings.
When BPF programs are called directly from C: from BPF helpers or
struct_ops, CFI warnings are generated.
Implement proper CFI prologues for the BPF programs and callbacks and
drop __nocfi for arm64. Fix the trampoline generation code to emit kCFI
prologue when a struct_ops trampoline is being prepared.
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]>
---
arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h | 23 ++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 26 ++++++++++++----
3 files changed, 97 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..670e191f8628
--- /dev/null
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cfi.h
@@ -0,0 +1,23 @@
+/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */
+#ifndef _ASM_ARM64_CFI_H
+#define _ASM_ARM64_CFI_H
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_CFI_CLANG
+#define __bpfcall
+static inline int cfi_get_offset(void)
+{
+ return 4;
+}
+#define cfi_get_offset cfi_get_offset
+extern u32 cfi_bpf_hash;
+extern u32 cfi_bpf_subprog_hash;
+extern u32 cfi_get_func_hash(void *func);
+#else
+#define cfi_bpf_hash 0U
+#define cfi_bpf_subprog_hash 0U
+static inline u32 cfi_get_func_hash(void *func)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+#endif /* CONFIG_CFI_CLANG */
+#endif /* _ASM_ARM64_CFI_H */
diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
index 8ff6610af496..350057a28abe 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/alternative.c
@@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
#include <linux/elf.h>
#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
#include <asm/alternative.h>
+#include <asm/cfi.h>
#include <asm/cpufeature.h>
#include <asm/insn.h>
#include <asm/module.h>
@@ -298,3 +299,56 @@ noinstr void alt_cb_patch_nops(struct alt_instr *alt, __le32 *origptr,
updptr[i] = cpu_to_le32(aarch64_insn_gen_nop());
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(alt_cb_patch_nops);
+
+#ifdef CONFIG_CFI_CLANG
+struct bpf_insn;
+
+/* Must match bpf_func_t / DEFINE_BPF_PROG_RUN() */
+extern unsigned int __bpf_prog_runX(const void *ctx,
+ const struct bpf_insn *insn);
+
+/*
+ * Force a reference to the external symbol so the compiler generates
+ * __kcfi_typid.
+ */
+__ADDRESSABLE(__bpf_prog_runX);
+
+/* u32 __ro_after_init cfi_bpf_hash = __kcfi_typeid___bpf_prog_runX; */
+asm (
+" .pushsection .data..ro_after_init,\"aw\",@progbits \n"
+" .type cfi_bpf_hash,@object \n"
+" .globl cfi_bpf_hash \n"
+" .p2align 2, 0x0 \n"
+"cfi_bpf_hash: \n"
+" .long __kcfi_typeid___bpf_prog_runX \n"
+" .size cfi_bpf_hash, 4 \n"
+" .popsection \n"
+);
+
+/* Must match bpf_callback_t */
+extern u64 __bpf_callback_fn(u64, u64, u64, u64, u64);
+
+__ADDRESSABLE(__bpf_callback_fn);
+
+/* u32 __ro_after_init cfi_bpf_subprog_hash = __kcfi_typeid___bpf_callback_fn; */
+asm (
+" .pushsection .data..ro_after_init,\"aw\",@progbits \n"
+" .type cfi_bpf_subprog_hash,@object \n"
+" .globl cfi_bpf_subprog_hash \n"
+" .p2align 2, 0x0 \n"
+"cfi_bpf_subprog_hash: \n"
+" .word __kcfi_typeid___bpf_callback_fn \n"
+" .size cfi_bpf_subprog_hash, 4 \n"
+" .popsection \n"
+);
+
+u32 cfi_get_func_hash(void *func)
+{
+ u32 hash;
+
+ if (get_kernel_nofault(hash, func - cfi_get_offset()))
+ return 0;
+
+ return hash;
+}
+#endif
diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index cfd5434de483..fb02862e1a3a 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@
#include <asm/asm-extable.h>
#include <asm/byteorder.h>
#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
+#include <asm/cfi.h>
#include <asm/debug-monitors.h>
#include <asm/insn.h>
#include <asm/patching.h>
@@ -157,6 +158,12 @@ static inline void emit_bti(u32 insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
emit(insn, ctx);
}
+static inline void emit_kcfi(u32 hash, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
+{
+ if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_CFI_CLANG))
+ emit(hash, ctx);
+}
+
/*
* Kernel addresses in the vmalloc space use at most 48 bits, and the
* remaining bits are guaranteed to be 0x1. So we can compose the address
@@ -285,7 +292,7 @@ static bool is_lsi_offset(int offset, int scale)
/* Tail call offset to jump into */
#define PROLOGUE_OFFSET (BTI_INSNS + 2 + PAC_INSNS + 8)
-static int build_prologue(struct jit_ctx *ctx, bool ebpf_from_cbpf)
+static int build_prologue(struct jit_ctx *ctx, bool ebpf_from_cbpf, bool is_subprog)
{
const struct bpf_prog *prog = ctx->prog;
const bool is_main_prog = !bpf_is_subprog(prog);
@@ -296,7 +303,6 @@ static int build_prologue(struct jit_ctx *ctx, bool ebpf_from_cbpf)
const u8 fp = bpf2a64[BPF_REG_FP];
const u8 tcc = bpf2a64[TCALL_CNT];
const u8 fpb = bpf2a64[FP_BOTTOM];
- const int idx0 = ctx->idx;
int cur_offset;
/*
@@ -322,6 +328,8 @@ static int build_prologue(struct jit_ctx *ctx, bool ebpf_from_cbpf)
*
*/
+ emit_kcfi(is_subprog ? cfi_bpf_subprog_hash : cfi_bpf_hash, ctx);
+ const int idx0 = ctx->idx;
/* bpf function may be invoked by 3 instruction types:
* 1. bl, attached via freplace to bpf prog via short jump
* 2. br, attached via freplace to bpf prog via long jump
@@ -1575,7 +1583,7 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
* BPF line info needs ctx->offset[i] to be the offset of
* instruction[i] in jited image, so build prologue first.
*/
- if (build_prologue(&ctx, was_classic)) {
+ if (build_prologue(&ctx, was_classic, bpf_is_subprog(prog))) {
prog = orig_prog;
goto out_off;
}
@@ -1614,7 +1622,7 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
ctx.idx = 0;
ctx.exentry_idx = 0;
- build_prologue(&ctx, was_classic);
+ build_prologue(&ctx, was_classic, bpf_is_subprog(prog));
if (build_body(&ctx, extra_pass)) {
bpf_jit_binary_free(header);
@@ -1654,9 +1662,9 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
jit_data->image = image_ptr;
jit_data->header = header;
}
- prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.image;
+ prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx.image + cfi_get_offset();
prog->jited = 1;
- prog->jited_len = prog_size;
+ prog->jited_len = prog_size - cfi_get_offset();
if (!prog->is_func || extra_pass) {
int i;
@@ -1905,6 +1913,12 @@ static int prepare_trampoline(struct jit_ctx *ctx, struct bpf_tramp_image *im,
/* return address locates above FP */
retaddr_off = stack_size + 8;
+ if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_INDIRECT) {
+ /*
+ * Indirect call for bpf_struct_ops
+ */
+ emit_kcfi(cfi_get_func_hash(func_addr), ctx);
+ }
/* bpf trampoline may be invoked by 3 instruction types:
* 1. bl, attached to bpf prog or kernel function via short jump
* 2. br, attached to bpf prog or kernel function via long jump
--
2.40.1
On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 7:11 AM Puranjay Mohan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On ARM64 with CONFIG_CFI_CLANG, CFI warnings can be triggered by running
> the bpf selftests. This is because the JIT doesn't emit proper CFI prologues
> for BPF programs, callbacks, and struct_ops trampolines.
>
> Example Warning:
>
> CFI failure at bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4 (target: bpf_prog_fb8b097ab47d164a_less+0x0/0x98; expected type: 0x9e4709a9)
> WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1488 at bpf_rbtree_add_impl+0x120/0x1d4
..
> Running the selftests causes no CFI warnings:
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> test_progs: Summary: 454/3613 PASSED, 62 SKIPPED, 74 FAILED
> test_tag: OK (40945 tests)
> test_verifier: Summary: 789 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
Catalin, Mark,
Could you please review and hopefully ack arm64 generic bits ?
The JIT changes largely mimic x86 changes and look correct to me.