mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	 Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	 Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>,
	 Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	 Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
	 Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	 Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	 Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
	Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,  Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
	 linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/4] bpf: Fix a struct_ops use-after-free behind a flaky assoc_in_timer test
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2026 10:59:04 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20261016-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-v4-0-9ad31c21220c@gmail.com> (raw)

st_ops_assoc_in_timer_no_uref drops every reference to a struct_ops map
and expects a timer callback of its prog, 500ms later, to find no
struct_ops associated anymore. It fails now and then while test_progs
runs other tests in parallel.

Since commit 5db69b0fbdc8 ("bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period
optional"), a struct_ops map clears the association only after the RCU
grace period of bpf_map_put(), so nothing waits for a prog that reads
the association in between. A timer callback can then return into a
freed trampoline, and the kernel hits an int3 Oops.

Patch 1 lets the association be cleared in any context, and patch 2
clears it in map_free_pre_rcu(), so that the grace period bpf_map_put()
already waits for follows it. Patch 3 adds a test that catches a map
freed under a running .test_1. Patch 4 has the timer callback of
st_ops_assoc_in_timer_no_uref retry until the association is gone.

Signed-off-by: Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>
---
V3 -> V4:
- Clear the association in map_free_pre_rcu() instead of deferring the
  free of the map (Amery Hung)
- Add patch 1, replacing st_ops_assoc_mutex with a spinlock, since
  map_free_pre_rcu() may run in softirq
- Stop st_ops_assoc_in_timer_free and _no_uref when running syscall_prog
  fails, instead of waiting for the timer forever (Sashiko)
- Point Fixes of patch 4 at 0e841d19263ab, which added the test, as the
  delay left after patch 2 comes from freeing syscall_prog

V2 -> V3:
- Wait for an RCU tasks trace grace period in patch 1 for every map, so
  that progs reading the association under RCU tasks trace, e.g. from a
  bpf_wq callback, are waited for too (CI bot)

V1 -> V2:
- Add patch 1, fixing the use-after-free behind the flaky test (CI bot)
- Add patch 2, a test for the use-after-free
- Point Fixes of patch 3 at 5db69b0fbdc8 (CI bot)
- Move the restarting of the timer into patch 2, which needs it too,
  so patch 3 only turns it on for st_ops_assoc_in_timer_no_uref
- Rebase onto current bpf-next

v3: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261015-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-v3-0-efe643d4b2a3@gmail.com
v2: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261010-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-v2-0-d7a43896dbf1@gmail.com
v1: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20261009-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-v1-1-9a97a9b3d1db@gmail.com

---
Qiliang Yuan (4):
      bpf: Protect the struct_ops association with a spinlock
      bpf: Dissociate struct_ops progs before the grace period of the map
      selftests/bpf: Test freeing a struct_ops map under a running prog
      selftests/bpf: Wait for the struct_ops map to be freed in assoc_in_timer

 include/linux/bpf.h                                |  2 +-
 kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c                        | 28 ++++++++++--------
 kernel/bpf/core.c                                  |  3 +-
 .../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c         | 34 ++++++++++++++++++----
 .../bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_in_timer.c          | 16 ++++++++++
 5 files changed, 63 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
---
base-commit: 15b578b1715d9a318c804350d98af87c203672bc
change-id: 20261009-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-5eb0295ec300

Best regards,
-- 
Qiliang Yuan <odys.yuan@gmail.com>


             reply	other threads:[~2026-10-16  2:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-16  2:59 Qiliang Yuan [this message]
2026-10-16  2:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/4] bpf: Protect the struct_ops association with a spinlock Qiliang Yuan
2026-10-16  2:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/4] bpf: Dissociate struct_ops progs before the grace period of the map Qiliang Yuan
2026-10-16 19:06   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-10-16  2:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/4] selftests/bpf: Test freeing a struct_ops map under a running prog Qiliang Yuan
2026-10-16  2:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Wait for the struct_ops map to be freed in assoc_in_timer Qiliang Yuan

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20261016-selftests-bpf-struct-ops-assoc-timer-v4-0-9ad31c21220c@gmail.com \
    --to=odys.yuan@gmail.com \
    --cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
    --cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®