@@ -343,14 +343,13 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_read_value_proto = {
.arg4_type = ARG_CONST_SIZE,
};
-static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct perf_sample_data, bpf_sd);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct perf_sample_data, bpf_trace_sd);
static __always_inline u64
__bpf_perf_event_output(struct pt_regs *regs, struct bpf_map *map,
- u64 flags, struct perf_raw_record *raw)
+ u64 flags, struct perf_sample_data *sd)
{
struct bpf_array *array = container_of(map, struct bpf_array, map);
- struct perf_sample_data *sd = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_sd);
unsigned int cpu = smp_processor_id();
u64 index = flags & BPF_F_INDEX_MASK;
struct bpf_event_entry *ee;
@@ -373,8 +372,6 @@ __bpf_perf_event_output(struct pt_regs *regs, struct bpf_map *map,
if (unlikely(event->oncpu != cpu))
return -EOPNOTSUPP;
- perf_sample_data_init(sd, 0, 0);
- sd->raw = raw;
perf_event_output(event, sd, regs);
return 0;
}
@@ -382,6 +379,7 @@ __bpf_perf_event_output(struct pt_regs *regs, struct bpf_map *map,
BPF_CALL_5(bpf_perf_event_output, struct pt_regs *, regs, struct bpf_map *, map,
u64, flags, void *, data, u64, size)
{
+ struct perf_sample_data *sd = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_trace_sd);
struct perf_raw_record raw = {
.frag = {
.size = size,
@@ -392,7 +390,10 @@ BPF_CALL_5(bpf_perf_event_output, struct pt_regs *, regs, struct bpf_map *, map,
if (unlikely(flags & ~(BPF_F_INDEX_MASK)))
return -EINVAL;
- return __bpf_perf_event_output(regs, map, flags, &raw);
+ perf_sample_data_init(sd, 0, 0);
+ sd->raw = &raw;
+
+ return __bpf_perf_event_output(regs, map, flags, sd);
}
static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_output_proto = {
@@ -407,10 +408,12 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_perf_event_output_proto = {
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct pt_regs, bpf_pt_regs);
+static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct perf_sample_data, bpf_misc_sd);
u64 bpf_event_output(struct bpf_map *map, u64 flags, void *meta, u64 meta_size,
void *ctx, u64 ctx_size, bpf_ctx_copy_t ctx_copy)
{
+ struct perf_sample_data *sd = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_misc_sd);
struct pt_regs *regs = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_pt_regs);
struct perf_raw_frag frag = {
.copy = ctx_copy,
@@ -428,8 +431,10 @@ u64 bpf_event_output(struct bpf_map *map, u64 flags, void *meta, u64 meta_size,
};
perf_fetch_caller_regs(regs);
+ perf_sample_data_init(sd, 0, 0);
+ sd->raw = &raw;
- return __bpf_perf_event_output(regs, map, flags, &raw);
+ return __bpf_perf_event_output(regs, map, flags, sd);
}
BPF_CALL_0(bpf_get_current_task)
When tracing and networking programs are both attached in the system and both use event-output helpers that eventually call into perf_event_output(), then we could end up in a situation where the tracing attached program runs in user context while a cls_bpf program is triggered on that same CPU out of softirq context. Since both rely on the same per-cpu perf_sample_data, we could potentially corrupt it. This can only ever happen in a combination of the two types; all tracing programs use a bpf_prog_active counter to bail out in case a program is already running on that CPU out of a different context. XDP and cls_bpf programs by themselves don't have this issue as they run in the same context only. Therefore, split both perf_sample_data so they cannot be accessed from each other. Fixes: 20b9d7ac4852 ("bpf: avoid excessive stack usage for perf_sample_data") Reported-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Tested-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> --- kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 19 ++++++++++++------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)