[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAJ+HfNhC=hfFnjVvCf=bw+n1msRjR3gGUyapAmsRDupZ5CusrQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2021 18:55:10 +0200
From: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
To: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmerdabbelt@...gle.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@...il.com>,
Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
linux-riscv <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next,v3] riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables
On Wed, 27 Oct 2021 at 13:03, Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com> wrote:
>
> When a tracing BPF program attempts to read memory without using the
> bpf_probe_read() helper, the verifier marks the load instruction with
> the BPF_PROBE_MEM flag. Since the riscv JIT does not currently recognize
> this flag it falls back to the interpreter.
>
> Add support for BPF_PROBE_MEM, by appending an exception table to the
> BPF program. If the load instruction causes a data abort, the fixup
> infrastructure finds the exception table and fixes up the fault, by
> clearing the destination register and jumping over the faulting
> instruction.
>
> A more generic solution would add a "handler" field to the table entry,
> like on x86 and s390.
>
> The same issue in ARM64 is fixed in:
> commit 800834285361 ("bpf, arm64: Add BPF exception tables")
>
> Signed-off-by: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@...wei.com>
> Tested-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@...wei.com>
> ---
> v3:
> Modify according to Björn's comments, mainly code optimization.
Thank you!
I ran this patch against the test_bpf.ko, and selftests/bpf -- no
regressions, and after the patch is applied more tests passes. Yay!
On a related note. The RISC-V selftests/bpf is in a pretty lousy
state. I'll send a cleanup patch for them soonish. E.g.:
* RISC-V is missing in bpf_tracing.h (libbpf)
* Some programs don't converge in 16 steps, I had to increase it to ~32
* The selftest/bpf Makefile needed some RV specific changes
* ...a lot of tests still don't pass, and needs to be looked in to
Feel free to add:
Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>
> v2:
> Modify according to Björn's comments, mainly removes redundant head files
> extable.h and some code style issues.
>
> arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 19 +++-
> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h | 1 +
> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 185 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c | 19 ++--
> 4 files changed, 177 insertions(+), 47 deletions(-)
>
[...]
Björn
Powered by blists - more mailing lists