Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Fix RCU usage in bpf_get_cgroup_classid_curr helper

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 6/9/25 5:51 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2025 at 8:35 AM Charalampos Mitrodimas
<charmitro@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The commit ee971630f20f ("bpf: Allow some trace helpers for all prog
types") made bpf_get_cgroup_classid_curr helper available to all BPF
program types.  This helper used __task_get_classid() which calls
task_cls_state() that requires rcu_read_lock_bh_held().

This triggers an RCU warning when called from BPF syscall programs
which run under rcu_read_lock_trace():

   WARNING: suspicious RCU usage
   6.15.0-rc4-syzkaller-g079e5c56a5c4 #0 Not tainted
   -----------------------------
   net/core/netclassid_cgroup.c:24 suspicious rcu_dereference_check() usage!

Fix this by replacing __task_get_classid() with task_cls_classid()
which handles RCU locking internally using regular rcu_read_lock() and
is safe to call from any context.

Reported-by: syzbot+b4169a1cfb945d2ed0ec@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Closes: https://syzkaller.appspot.com/bug?extid=b4169a1cfb945d2ed0ec
Fixes: ee971630f20f ("bpf: Allow some trace helpers for all prog types")
Signed-off-by: Charalampos Mitrodimas <charmitro@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  net/core/filter.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index 30e7d36790883b29174654315738e93237e21dd0..3b3f81cf674dde7d2bd83488450edad4e129bdac 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -3083,7 +3083,7 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_msg_pop_data_proto = {
  #ifdef CONFIG_CGROUP_NET_CLASSID
  BPF_CALL_0(bpf_get_cgroup_classid_curr)
  {
-       return __task_get_classid(current);
+       return task_cls_classid(current);
  }

Daniel added this helper in
commit 5a52ae4e32a6 ("bpf: Allow to retrieve cgroup v1 classid from v2 hooks")
with intention to use it from networking hooks.

But task_cls_classid() has
         if (in_interrupt())
                 return 0;

which will trigger in softirq and tc hooks.
So this might break Daniel's use case.

Yeap, we cannot break tc(x) BPF programs. It probably makes sense to have
a new helper implementation for the more generic, non-networking case which
then internally uses task_cls_classid().

Thanks,
Daniel




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux