Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

dkms modules fail to install with 5.11 linux headers (missing autoconf.h) #48

Open
jmstriegel opened this issue Apr 10, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@jmstriegel
Copy link

After a recent update to the 5.11 kernel, I noticed that the bcmwl-kernel-source wireless driver stopped working. Attempting to reinstall, I noticed the following message during the dkms build:

ERROR (dkms apport): kernel package linux-headers-5.11.0-7612-generic is not supported

This also caused the system76-dkms and system76-io-dkms packages to discontinue working on my system.

I ended up tracking this down to a missing /usr/src/linux-headers-5.11.0-7612-generic/include/generated/autoconf.h file. I tried manually reinstalling linux-headers-5.11.0-7612-generic, which includes the file, but for some reason autoconf.h refuses to install to the destination folder. I had to manually extract it from the .deb and copy it to the destination, after which the dkms modules all build and appear to function correctly.

I suspect this a deb packaging issue, but it's not clear to me how this file is being excluded from installation. I've seen a number of somewhat similar bug reports for broken drivers/firmware that may be linked to this.

@bflanagin
Copy link

Thanks for the report @jmstriegel. We've updated the kernel since 7612 to 7614 and I've verified that autoconf.h is included. Can you verify and confirm the issues you had with 7612 aren't present?

jackpot51 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jun 22, 2021
BugLink: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1929455

[ Upstream commit 0f20615 ]

Fix BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() macro used for reading CO-RE-relocatable
bitfields. Missing breaks in a switch caused 8-byte reads always. This can
confuse libbpf because it does strict checks that memory load size corresponds
to the original size of the field, which in this case quite often would be
wrong.

After fixing that, we run into another problem, which quite subtle, so worth
documenting here. The issue is in Clang optimization and CO-RE relocation
interactions. Without that asm volatile construct (also known as
barrier_var()), Clang will re-order BYTE_OFFSET and BYTE_SIZE relocations and
will apply BYTE_OFFSET 4 times for each switch case arm. This will result in
the same error from libbpf about mismatch of memory load size and original
field size. I.e., if we were reading u32, we'd still have *(u8 *), *(u16 *),
*(u32 *), and *(u64 *) memory loads, three of which will fail. Using
barrier_var() forces Clang to apply BYTE_OFFSET relocation first (and once) to
calculate p, after which value of p is used without relocation in each of
switch case arms, doing appropiately-sized memory load.

Here's the list of relevant relocations and pieces of generated BPF code
before and after this patch for test_core_reloc_bitfields_direct selftests.

BEFORE
=====
 #45: core_reloc: insn #160 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #46: core_reloc: insn #167 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #47: core_reloc: insn #174 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #48: core_reloc: insn #178 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #49: core_reloc: insn #182 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     157:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     159:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     160:       b7 02 00 00 04 00 00 00 r2 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     161:       66 02 07 00 03 00 00 00 if w2 s> 3 goto +7 <LBB0_63>
     162:       16 02 0d 00 01 00 00 00 if w2 == 1 goto +13 <LBB0_65>
     163:       16 02 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w2 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     164:       05 00 12 00 00 00 00 00 goto +18 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000528 <LBB0_66>:
     165:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     167:       69 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     168:       05 00 0e 00 00 00 00 00 goto +14 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000548 <LBB0_63>:
     169:       16 02 0a 00 04 00 00 00 if w2 == 4 goto +10 <LBB0_67>
     170:       16 02 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w2 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     171:       05 00 0b 00 00 00 00 00 goto +11 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000560 <LBB0_68>:
     172:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     174:       79 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     175:       05 00 07 00 00 00 00 00 goto +7 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000580 <LBB0_65>:
     176:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     178:       71 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ WRONG size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     179:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

00000000000005a0 <LBB0_67>:
     180:       18 01 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = 0 ll
     182:       61 11 08 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 8)
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here w/ RIGHT size        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000005b8 <LBB0_69>:
     183:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     184:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     185:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     186:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     187:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000005e0 <LBB0_71>:
     188:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 32

AFTER
=====

 #30: core_reloc: insn #132 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_off --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32
 #31: core_reloc: insn #134 --> [5] + 0:5: byte_sz --> struct core_reloc_bitfields.u32

     129:       18 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0 ll
     131:       7b 12 20 01 00 00 00 00 *(u64 *)(r2 + 288) = r1
     132:       b7 01 00 00 08 00 00 00 r1 = 8
; BYTE_OFFSET relo here                     ^^^
; no size check for non-memory dereferencing instructions
     133:       0f 12 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 += r1
     134:       b7 03 00 00 04 00 00 00 r3 = 4
; BYTE_SIZE relocation here                 ^^^
     135:       66 03 05 00 03 00 00 00 if w3 s> 3 goto +5 <LBB0_63>
     136:       16 03 09 00 01 00 00 00 if w3 == 1 goto +9 <LBB0_65>
     137:       16 03 01 00 02 00 00 00 if w3 == 2 goto +1 <LBB0_66>
     138:       05 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 goto +10 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000458 <LBB0_66>:
     139:       69 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u16 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     140:       05 00 08 00 00 00 00 00 goto +8 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000468 <LBB0_63>:
     141:       16 03 06 00 04 00 00 00 if w3 == 4 goto +6 <LBB0_67>
     142:       16 03 01 00 08 00 00 00 if w3 == 8 goto +1 <LBB0_68>
     143:       05 00 05 00 00 00 00 00 goto +5 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000480 <LBB0_68>:
     144:       79 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u64 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     145:       05 00 03 00 00 00 00 00 goto +3 <LBB0_69>

0000000000000490 <LBB0_65>:
     146:       71 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u8 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
     147:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_69>

00000000000004a0 <LBB0_67>:
     148:       61 21 00 00 00 00 00 00 r1 = *(u32 *)(r2 + 0)
; NO CO-RE relocation here                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

00000000000004a8 <LBB0_69>:
     149:       67 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 <<= 32
     150:       b7 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 r2 = 0
     151:       16 02 02 00 00 00 00 00 if w2 == 0 goto +2 <LBB0_71>
     152:       c7 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 s>>= 32
     153:       05 00 01 00 00 00 00 00 goto +1 <LBB0_72>

00000000000004d0 <LBB0_71>:
     154:       77 01 00 00 20 00 00 00 r1 >>= 323

Fixes: ee26dad ("libbpf: Add support for relocatable bitfields")
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Lorenz Bauer <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Kamal Mostafa <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Kelsey Skunberg <[email protected]>
jackpot51 pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 20, 2023
[ Upstream commit 5439cfa ]

Occasionally, with './test_progs -j' on my vm, I will hit the
following failure:

  test_cgrp_local_storage:PASS:join_cgroup /cgrp_local_storage 0 nsec
  test_cgroup_iter_sleepable:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
  test_cgroup_iter_sleepable:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec
  test_cgroup_iter_sleepable:PASS:attach_iter 0 nsec
  test_cgroup_iter_sleepable:PASS:iter_create 0 nsec
  test_cgroup_iter_sleepable:FAIL:cgroup_id unexpected cgroup_id: actual 1 != expected 2812
  #48/5    cgrp_local_storage/cgroup_iter_sleepable:FAIL
  #48      cgrp_local_storage:FAIL

Finally, I decided to do some investigation since the test is introduced
by myself. It turns out the reason is due to cgroup_fd with value 0.
In cgroup_iter, a cgroup_fd of value 0 means the root cgroup.

	/* from cgroup_iter.c */
        if (fd)
                cgrp = cgroup_v1v2_get_from_fd(fd);
        else if (id)
                cgrp = cgroup_get_from_id(id);
        else /* walk the entire hierarchy by default. */
                cgrp = cgroup_get_from_path("/");

That is why we got cgroup_id 1 instead of expected 2812.

Why we got a cgroup_fd 0? Nobody should really touch 'stdin' (fd 0) in
test_progs. I traced 'close' syscall with stack trace and found the root
cause, which is a bug in bpf_obj_pinning.c. Basically, the code closed
fd 0 although it should not. Fixing the bug in bpf_obj_pinning.c also
resolved the above cgroup_iter_sleepable subtest failure.

Fixes: 3b22f98 ("selftests/bpf: Add path_fd-based BPF_OBJ_PIN and BPF_OBJ_GET tests")
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
mmstick pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 2, 2024
[ Upstream commit fe57575 ]

The `cgrp_local_storage` test triggers a kernel panic like:

  # ./test_progs -t cgrp_local_storage
  Can't find bpf_testmod.ko kernel module: -2
  WARNING! Selftests relying on bpf_testmod.ko will be skipped.
  [  550.930632] CPU 1 Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address 0000000000000080, era == ffff80000200be34, ra == ffff80000200be00
  [  550.931781] Oops[#1]:
  [  550.931966] CPU: 1 PID: 1303 Comm: test_progs Not tainted 6.7.0-rc2-loong-devel-g2f56bb0d2327 #35 a896aca3f4164f09cc346f89f2e09832e07be5f6
  [  550.932215] Hardware name: QEMU QEMU Virtual Machine, BIOS unknown 2/2/2022
  [  550.932403] pc ffff80000200be34 ra ffff80000200be00 tp 9000000108350000 sp 9000000108353dc0
  [  550.932545] a0 0000000000000000 a1 0000000000000517 a2 0000000000000118 a3 00007ffffbb15558
  [  550.932682] a4 00007ffffbb15620 a5 90000001004e7700 a6 0000000000000021 a7 0000000000000118
  [  550.932824] t0 ffff80000200bdc0 t1 0000000000000517 t2 0000000000000517 t3 00007ffff1c06ee0
  [  550.932961] t4 0000555578ae04d0 t5 fffffffffffffff8 t6 0000000000000004 t7 0000000000000020
  [  550.933097] t8 0000000000000040 u0 00000000000007b8 s9 9000000108353e00 s0 90000001004e7700
  [  550.933241] s1 9000000004005000 s2 0000000000000001 s3 0000000000000000 s4 0000555555eb2ec8
  [  550.933379] s5 00007ffffbb15bb8 s6 00007ffff1dafd60 s7 000055555663f610 s8 00007ffff1db0050
  [  550.933520]    ra: ffff80000200be00 bpf_prog_98f1b9e767be2a84_on_enter+0x40/0x200
  [  550.933911]   ERA: ffff80000200be34 bpf_prog_98f1b9e767be2a84_on_enter+0x74/0x200
  [  550.934105]  CRMD: 000000b0 (PLV0 -IE -DA +PG DACF=CC DACM=CC -WE)
  [  550.934596]  PRMD: 00000004 (PPLV0 +PIE -PWE)
  [  550.934712]  EUEN: 00000003 (+FPE +SXE -ASXE -BTE)
  [  550.934836]  ECFG: 00071c1c (LIE=2-4,10-12 VS=7)
  [  550.934976] ESTAT: 00010000 [PIL] (IS= ECode=1 EsubCode=0)
  [  550.935097]  BADV: 0000000000000080
  [  550.935181]  PRID: 0014c010 (Loongson-64bit, Loongson-3A5000)
  [  550.935291] Modules linked in:
  [  550.935391] Process test_progs (pid: 1303, threadinfo=000000006c3b1c41, task=0000000061f84a55)
  [  550.935643] Stack : 00007ffffbb15bb8 0000555555eb2ec8 0000000000000000 0000000000000001
  [  550.935844]         9000000004005000 ffff80001b864000 00007ffffbb15450 90000000029aa034
  [  550.935990]         0000000000000000 9000000108353ec0 0000000000000118 d07d9dfb09721a09
  [  550.936175]         0000000000000001 0000000000000000 9000000108353ec0 0000000000000118
  [  550.936314]         9000000101d46ad0 900000000290abf0 000055555663f610 0000000000000000
  [  550.936479]         0000000000000003 9000000108353ec0 00007ffffbb15450 90000000029d7288
  [  550.936635]         00007ffff1dafd60 000055555663f610 0000000000000000 0000000000000003
  [  550.936779]         9000000108353ec0 90000000035dd1f0 00007ffff1dafd58 9000000002841c5c
  [  550.936939]         0000000000000119 0000555555eea5a8 00007ffff1d78780 00007ffffbb153e0
  [  550.937083]         ffffffffffffffda 00007ffffbb15518 0000000000000040 00007ffffbb15558
  [  550.937224]         ...
  [  550.937299] Call Trace:
  [  550.937521] [<ffff80000200be34>] bpf_prog_98f1b9e767be2a84_on_enter+0x74/0x200
  [  550.937910] [<90000000029aa034>] bpf_trace_run2+0x90/0x154
  [  550.938105] [<900000000290abf0>] syscall_trace_enter.isra.0+0x1cc/0x200
  [  550.938224] [<90000000035dd1f0>] do_syscall+0x48/0x94
  [  550.938319] [<9000000002841c5c>] handle_syscall+0xbc/0x158
  [  550.938477]
  [  550.938607] Code: 580009ae  50016000  262402e4 <28c20085> 14092084  03a00084  16000024  03240084  00150006
  [  550.938851]
  [  550.939021] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]---

Further investigation shows that this panic is triggered by memory
load operations:

  ptr = bpf_cgrp_storage_get(&map_a, task->cgroups->dfl_cgrp, 0,
                             BPF_LOCAL_STORAGE_GET_F_CREATE);

The expression `task->cgroups->dfl_cgrp` involves two memory load.
Since the field offset fits in imm12 or imm14, we use ldd or ldptrd
instructions. But both instructions have the side effect that it will
signed-extended the imm operand. Finally, we got the wrong addresses
and panics is inevitable.

Use a generic ldxd instruction to avoid this kind of issues.

With this change, we have:

  # ./test_progs -t cgrp_local_storage
  Can't find bpf_testmod.ko kernel module: -2
  WARNING! Selftests relying on bpf_testmod.ko will be skipped.
  test_cgrp_local_storage:PASS:join_cgroup /cgrp_local_storage 0 nsec
  #48/1    cgrp_local_storage/tp_btf:OK
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:prog_attach 0 nsec
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:prog_attach 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'update_cookie_tracing': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  test_attach_cgroup:FAIL:prog_attach unexpected error: -524
  #48/2    cgrp_local_storage/attach_cgroup:FAIL
  test_recursion:PASS:skel_open_and_load 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'on_lookup': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  libbpf: prog 'on_lookup': failed to auto-attach: -524
  test_recursion:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -524 (errno 524)
  #48/3    cgrp_local_storage/recursion:FAIL
  #48/4    cgrp_local_storage/negative:OK
  #48/5    cgrp_local_storage/cgroup_iter_sleepable:OK
  test_yes_rcu_lock:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
  test_yes_rcu_lock:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'yes_rcu_lock': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  libbpf: prog 'yes_rcu_lock': failed to auto-attach: -524
  test_yes_rcu_lock:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -524 (errno 524)
  #48/6    cgrp_local_storage/yes_rcu_lock:FAIL
  #48/7    cgrp_local_storage/no_rcu_lock:OK
  #48      cgrp_local_storage:FAIL

  All error logs:
  test_cgrp_local_storage:PASS:join_cgroup /cgrp_local_storage 0 nsec
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:prog_attach 0 nsec
  test_attach_cgroup:PASS:prog_attach 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'update_cookie_tracing': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  test_attach_cgroup:FAIL:prog_attach unexpected error: -524
  #48/2    cgrp_local_storage/attach_cgroup:FAIL
  test_recursion:PASS:skel_open_and_load 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'on_lookup': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  libbpf: prog 'on_lookup': failed to auto-attach: -524
  test_recursion:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -524 (errno 524)
  #48/3    cgrp_local_storage/recursion:FAIL
  test_yes_rcu_lock:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
  test_yes_rcu_lock:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec
  libbpf: prog 'yes_rcu_lock': failed to attach: ERROR: strerror_r(-524)=22
  libbpf: prog 'yes_rcu_lock': failed to auto-attach: -524
  test_yes_rcu_lock:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -524 (errno 524)
  #48/6    cgrp_local_storage/yes_rcu_lock:FAIL
  #48      cgrp_local_storage:FAIL
  Summary: 0/4 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED

No panics any more (The test still failed because lack of BPF trampoline
which I am actively working on).

Fixes: 5dc6155 ("LoongArch: Add BPF JIT support")
Signed-off-by: Hengqi Chen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants