The bpf_rbtree_{remove,left,right} requires the root's lock to be held.
They also check the node_internal->owner is still owned by that root
before proceeding, so it is safe to allow refcounted bpf_rb_node
pointer to be used in these kfuncs.
In a bpf fq implementation which is much closer to the kernel fq,
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/
20250418224652.105998-13-martin.lau@linux.dev/,
a networking flow (allocated by bpf_obj_new) can be added to two different
rbtrees. There are cases that the flow is searched from one rbtree,
held the refcount of the flow, and then removed from another rbtree:
struct fq_flow {
struct bpf_rb_node fq_node;
struct bpf_rb_node rate_node;
struct bpf_refcount refcount;
unsigned long sk_long;
};
int bpf_fq_enqueue(...)
{
/* ... */
bpf_spin_lock(&root->lock);
while (can_loop) {
/* ... */
if (!p)
break;
gc_f = bpf_rb_entry(p, struct fq_flow, fq_node);
if (gc_f->sk_long == sk_long) {
f = bpf_refcount_acquire(gc_f);
break;
}
/* ... */
}
bpf_spin_unlock(&root->lock);
if (f) {
bpf_spin_lock(&q->lock);
bpf_rbtree_remove(&q->delayed, &f->rate_node);
bpf_spin_unlock(&q->lock);
}
}
bpf_rbtree_{left,right} do not need this change but are relaxed together
with bpf_rbtree_remove instead of adding extra verifier logic
to exclude these kfuncs.
To avoid bi-sect failure, this patch also changes the selftests together.
The "rbtree_api_remove_unadded_node" is not expecting verifier's error.
The test now expects bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &m->node) to return NULL.
The test uses __retval(0) to ensure this NULL return value.
Some of the "only take non-owning..." failure messages are changed also.
Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250506015857.817950-5-martin.lau@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
return -EINVAL;
}
} else {
- if (!type_is_non_owning_ref(reg->type) || reg->ref_obj_id) {
- verbose(env, "%s node input must be non-owning ref\n", func_name);
+ if (!type_is_non_owning_ref(reg->type) && !reg->ref_obj_id) {
+ verbose(env, "%s can only take non-owning or refcounted bpf_rb_node pointer\n", func_name);
return -EINVAL;
}
if (in_rbtree_lock_required_cb(env)) {
}
SEC("?tc")
-__failure __msg("rbtree_remove node input must be non-owning ref")
+__retval(0)
long rbtree_api_remove_unadded_node(void *ctx)
{
struct node_data *n, *m;
- struct bpf_rb_node *res;
+ struct bpf_rb_node *res_n, *res_m;
n = bpf_obj_new(typeof(*n));
if (!n)
bpf_spin_lock(&glock);
bpf_rbtree_add(&groot, &n->node, less);
- /* This remove should pass verifier */
- res = bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &n->node);
- n = container_of(res, struct node_data, node);
+ res_n = bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &n->node);
- /* This remove shouldn't, m isn't in an rbtree */
- res = bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &m->node);
- m = container_of(res, struct node_data, node);
+ res_m = bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &m->node);
bpf_spin_unlock(&glock);
- if (n)
- bpf_obj_drop(n);
- if (m)
- bpf_obj_drop(m);
+ bpf_obj_drop(m);
+ if (res_n)
+ bpf_obj_drop(container_of(res_n, struct node_data, node));
+ if (res_m) {
+ bpf_obj_drop(container_of(res_m, struct node_data, node));
+ /* m was not added to the rbtree */
+ return 2;
+ }
+
return 0;
}
}
SEC("?tc")
-__failure __msg("rbtree_remove node input must be non-owning ref")
+__failure __msg("bpf_rbtree_remove can only take non-owning or refcounted bpf_rb_node pointer")
long rbtree_api_add_release_unlock_escape(void *ctx)
{
struct node_data *n;
}
SEC("?tc")
-__failure __msg("rbtree_remove node input must be non-owning ref")
+__failure __msg("bpf_rbtree_remove can only take non-owning or refcounted bpf_rb_node pointer")
long rbtree_api_first_release_unlock_escape(void *ctx)
{
struct bpf_rb_node *res;