Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Subject: Re: BUG: unable to handle kernel paging request in bpf_dispatcher_xdp
To:     Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Hao Sun <sunhao.th@gmail.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
        Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@leemhuis.info>
References: <CAADnVQ+w-xtH=oWPYszG-TqxcHmbrKJK10C=P-o2Ouicx-9OUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQJ+9oiPEJaSgoXOmZwUEq9FnyLR3Kp38E_vuQo2PmDsbg@mail.gmail.com>
 <Y5Inw4HtkA2ql8GF@krava> <Y5JkomOZaCETLDaZ@krava> <Y5JtACA8ay5QNEi7@krava>
 <Y5LfMGbOHpaBfuw4@krava> <Y5MaffJOe1QtumSN@krava> <Y5M9P95l85oMHki9@krava>
 <Y5NSStSi7h9Vdo/j@krava> <5c9d77bf-75f5-954a-c691-39869bb22127@meta.com>
 <Y5OuQNmkoIvcV6IL@krava>
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Message-ID: <ee2a087e-b8c5-fc3e-a114-232490a6c3be@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Fri, 9 Dec 2022 23:41:11 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.7.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <Y5OuQNmkoIvcV6IL@krava>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk

On 12/9/22 10:53 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 12:31:06PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 12/9/22 7:20 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 02:50:55PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Dec 09, 2022 at 12:22:37PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>>>>
>>>> SBIP
>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to understand the severity of the issues and
>>>>>>>>>>> whether we need to revert that commit asap since the merge window
>>>>>>>>>>> is about to start.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Jiri, Peter,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ping.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> cc-ing Thorsten, since he's tracking it now.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The config has CONFIG_X86_KERNEL_IBT=y.
>>>>>>>>>> Is it related?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> sorry for late reply.. I still did not find the reason,
>>>>>>>>> but I did not try with IBT yet, will test now
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> no difference with IBT enabled, can't reproduce the issue
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ok, scratch that.. the reproducer got stuck on wifi init :-\
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> after I fix that I can now reproduce on my local config with
>>>>>>> IBT enabled or disabled.. it's something else
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm getting the error also when reverting the static call change,
>>>>>> looking for good commit, bisecting
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm getting fail with:
>>>>>>      f0c4d9fc9cc9 (tag: v6.1-rc4) Linux 6.1-rc4
>>>>>>
>>>>>> v6.1-rc1 is ok
>>>>>
>>>>> so far I narrowed it down between rc1 and rc3.. bisect got me nowhere so far
>>>>>
>>>>> attaching some more logs
>>>>
>>>> looking at the code.. how do we ensure that code running through
>>>> bpf_prog_run_xdp will not get dispatcher image changed while
>>>> it's being exetuted
>>>>
>>>> we use 'the other half' of the image when we add/remove programs,
>>>> but could bpf_dispatcher_update race with bpf_prog_run_xdp like:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> cpu 0:                                  cpu 1:
>>>>
>>>> bpf_prog_run_xdp
>>>>      ...
>>>>      bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func
>>>>         start exec image at offset 0x0
>>>>
>>>>                                           bpf_dispatcher_update
>>>>                                                   update image at offset 0x800
>>>>                                           bpf_dispatcher_update
>>>>                                                   update image at offset 0x0
>>>>
>>>>         still in image at offset 0x0
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> that might explain why I wasn't able to trigger that on
>>>> bare metal just in qemu
>>>
>>> I tried patch below and it fixes the issue for me and seems
>>> to confirm the race above.. but not sure it's the best fix
>>>
>>> jirka
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/dispatcher.c b/kernel/bpf/dispatcher.c
>>> index c19719f48ce0..6a2ced102fc7 100644
>>> --- a/kernel/bpf/dispatcher.c
>>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/dispatcher.c
>>> @@ -124,6 +124,7 @@ static void bpf_dispatcher_update(struct bpf_dispatcher *d, int prev_num_progs)
>>>    	}
>>>    	__BPF_DISPATCHER_UPDATE(d, new ?: (void *)&bpf_dispatcher_nop_func);
>>> +	synchronize_rcu_tasks();
>>>    	if (new)
>>>    		d->image_off = noff;
>>
>> This might work. In arch/x86/kernel/alternative.c, we have following
>> code and comments. For text_poke, synchronize_rcu_tasks() might be able
>> to avoid concurrent execution and update.
> 
> so my idea was that we need to ensure all the current callers of
> bpf_dispatcher_xdp_func (which should have rcu read lock, based
> on the comment in bpf_prog_run_xdp) are gone before and new ones
> execute the new image, so the next call to the bpf_dispatcher_update
> will be safe to overwrite the other half of the image

If v6.1-rc1 was indeed okay, then it looks like this may be related to
the trampoline patching for the static_call? Did it repro on v6.1-rc1
just with dbe69b299884 ("bpf: Fix dispatcher patchable function entry
to 5 bytes nop") cherry-picked?

>> /**
>>   * text_poke_copy - Copy instructions into (an unused part of) RX memory
>>   * @addr: address to modify
>>   * @opcode: source of the copy
>>   * @len: length to copy, could be more than 2x PAGE_SIZE
>>   *
>>   * Not safe against concurrent execution; useful for JITs to dump
>>   * new code blocks into unused regions of RX memory. Can be used in
>>   * conjunction with synchronize_rcu_tasks() to wait for existing
>>   * execution to quiesce after having made sure no existing functions
>>   * pointers are live.
>>   */
>> void *text_poke_copy(void *addr, const void *opcode, size_t len)
>> {
>>          unsigned long start = (unsigned long)addr;
>>          size_t patched = 0;
>>
>>          if (WARN_ON_ONCE(core_kernel_text(start)))
>>                  return NULL;
>>
>>          mutex_lock(&text_mutex);
>>          while (patched < len) {
>>                  unsigned long ptr = start + patched;
>>                  size_t s;
>>
>>                  s = min_t(size_t, PAGE_SIZE * 2 - offset_in_page(ptr), len -
>> patched);
>>
>>                  __text_poke(text_poke_memcpy, (void *)ptr, opcode + patched,
>> s);
>>                  patched += s;
>>          }
>>          mutex_unlock(&text_mutex);
>>          return addr;
>> }