@@ -14,6 +14,11 @@ struct bpf_rbtree {
BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_rbtree_btf_ids, struct, rb_node);
+static bool __rbtree_lock_held(struct bpf_rbtree *tree)
+{
+ return spin_is_locked((spinlock_t *)tree->lock);
+}
+
static int rbtree_map_alloc_check(union bpf_attr *attr)
{
if (attr->max_entries || !attr->btf_value_type_id)
@@ -93,6 +98,9 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_rbtree_add, struct bpf_map *, map, void *, value, void *, cb)
struct bpf_rbtree *tree = container_of(map, struct bpf_rbtree, map);
struct rb_node *node = (struct rb_node *)value;
+ if (!__rbtree_lock_held(tree))
+ return (u64)NULL;
+
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(!RB_EMPTY_NODE(node)))
return (u64)NULL;
@@ -114,6 +122,9 @@ BPF_CALL_3(bpf_rbtree_find, struct bpf_map *, map, void *, key, void *, cb)
{
struct bpf_rbtree *tree = container_of(map, struct bpf_rbtree, map);
+ if (!__rbtree_lock_held(tree))
+ return (u64)NULL;
+
return (u64)rb_find(key, &tree->root.rb_root,
(int (*)(const void *key,
const struct rb_node *))cb);
@@ -206,6 +217,9 @@ BPF_CALL_2(bpf_rbtree_remove, struct bpf_map *, map, void *, value)
struct bpf_rbtree *tree = container_of(map, struct bpf_rbtree, map);
struct rb_node *node = (struct rb_node *)value;
+ if (!__rbtree_lock_held(tree))
+ return (u64)NULL;
+
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(RB_EMPTY_NODE(node)))
return (u64)NULL;
The bpf program calling these helpers must hold the spinlock associated with the rbtree map when doing so. Otherwise, a concurrent add/remove operation could corrupt the tree while {add,remove,find} are walking it with callback or pivoting after update. Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> --- kernel/bpf/rbtree.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)