From: "Emil Tsalapatis" <emil@etsalapatis.com>
To: "Vlad Poenaru" <vlad.wing@gmail.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, "Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
"Eduard Zingerman" <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
"Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi" <memxor@gmail.com>,
"Song Liu" <song@kernel.org>,
"Yonghong Song" <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
"Jiri Olsa" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
Cc: "Emil Tsalapatis" <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <stable@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow access from sleepable BPF programs
Date: Tue, 09 Jun 2026 12:36:18 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DJ4NYD3BBJ3A.3TEL5PAOUE579@etsalapatis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260609135558.193287-2-vlad.wing@gmail.com>
On Tue Jun 9, 2026 at 9:55 AM EDT, Vlad Poenaru wrote:
> trie_lookup_elem() annotates its rcu_dereference_check() walks with
> only rcu_read_lock_bh_held(). Because rcu_dereference_check(p, c)
> resolves to "c || rcu_read_lock_held()", this passes for XDP/NAPI and
> classic RCU readers but fails for sleepable BPF programs, which enter
> via __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable() and hold only rcu_read_lock_trace().
>
> trie_update_elem() and trie_delete_elem() have the same problem in a
> different form: they walk the trie with plain rcu_dereference(), which
> asserts rcu_read_lock_held() unconditionally. Both are reachable from
> sleepable BPF programs via the bpf_map_update_elem / bpf_map_delete_elem
> helpers, and from the syscall path under classic rcu_read_lock(). In
> the writer paths the trie is actually protected by trie->lock (an
> rqspinlock taken across the walk); we never relied on the RCU read-side
> lock to keep nodes alive there.
>
> A sleepable LSM hook that ends up touching an LPM trie therefore
> triggers lockdep on debug kernels:
>
> =============================
> WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
> 7.1.0-... Tainted: G E
> -----------------------------
> kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c:249 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!
> 1 lock held by net_tests/540:
> #0: (rcu_tasks_trace_srcu_struct){....}-{0:0},
> at: __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable+0x26/0x280
> Call Trace:
> dump_stack_lvl
> lockdep_rcu_suspicious
> trie_lookup_elem
> bpf_prog_..._enforce_security_socket_connect
> bpf_trampoline_...
> security_socket_connect
> __sys_connect
> do_syscall_64
>
> This is lockdep-only -- no UAF, since Tasks Trace RCU does serialize
> against the trie's reclaim path -- but it spams the console once per
> distinct callsite on every debug kernel running a sleepable BPF LSM
> that touches an LPM trie, which is increasingly common.
>
> For the lookup path, switch the rcu_dereference_check() annotation
> from rcu_read_lock_bh_held() to bpf_rcu_lock_held(), which accepts all
> three contexts (classic, BH, Tasks Trace). Other map types already
> follow this convention.
>
> For trie_update_elem() and trie_delete_elem(), annotate the walks as
> rcu_dereference_protected(*p, 1) -- matching trie_free() in the same
> file -- since trie->lock is held across the walk. rqspinlock has no
> lockdep_map, so the predicate degenerates to '1' rather than
> lockdep_is_held(&trie->lock); the protection is real but not
> machine-verifiable. trie_get_next_key() also uses bare
> rcu_dereference() but is reachable only from the BPF syscall, which
> holds classic rcu_read_lock() before dispatching, so it is left
> untouched.
>
> Fixes: 694cea395fde ("bpf: Allow RCU-protected lookups to happen from bh context")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
> Signed-off-by: Vlad Poenaru <vlad.wing@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c b/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> index 0f57608b385d..4d6f25db9ba1 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/lpm_trie.c
> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static void *trie_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *_key)
>
> /* Start walking the trie from the root node ... */
>
> - for (node = rcu_dereference_check(trie->root, rcu_read_lock_bh_held());
> + for (node = rcu_dereference_check(trie->root, bpf_rcu_lock_held());
> node;) {
> unsigned int next_bit;
> size_t matchlen;
> @@ -280,7 +280,7 @@ static void *trie_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *_key)
> */
> next_bit = extract_bit(key->data, node->prefixlen);
> node = rcu_dereference_check(node->child[next_bit],
> - rcu_read_lock_bh_held());
> + bpf_rcu_lock_held());
> }
>
> if (!found)
> @@ -359,7 +359,7 @@ static long trie_update_elem(struct bpf_map *map,
> */
> slot = &trie->root;
>
> - while ((node = rcu_dereference(*slot))) {
> + while ((node = rcu_dereference_protected(*slot, 1))) {
> matchlen = longest_prefix_match(trie, node, key);
>
> if (node->prefixlen != matchlen ||
> @@ -482,7 +482,7 @@ static long trie_delete_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *_key)
> trim = &trie->root;
> trim2 = trim;
> parent = NULL;
> - while ((node = rcu_dereference(*trim))) {
> + while ((node = rcu_dereference_protected(*trim, 1))) {
> matchlen = longest_prefix_match(trie, node, key);
>
> if (node->prefixlen != matchlen ||
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-09 16:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-29 17:42 [PATCH bpf] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow lookups " Vlad Poenaru
2026-05-29 19:19 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-06-09 13:55 ` [PATCH bpf v2 0/2] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow sleepable BPF programs to use LPM tries Vlad Poenaru
2026-06-09 13:55 ` [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow access from sleepable BPF programs Vlad Poenaru
2026-06-09 16:36 ` Emil Tsalapatis [this message]
2026-06-09 13:55 ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow sleepable programs to use LPM trie maps directly Vlad Poenaru
2026-06-09 16:19 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-06-10 1:53 ` Hou Tao
2026-06-10 2:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-06-09 19:50 ` [PATCH bpf v2 0/2] bpf, lpm_trie: Allow sleepable BPF programs to use LPM tries patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=DJ4NYD3BBJ3A.3TEL5PAOUE579@etsalapatis.com \
--to=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=vlad.wing@gmail.com \
--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®