[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <f1e14934-dc54-9bf7-501a-89affdb7371e@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 20:01:16 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@...weicloud.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Florent Revest <revest@...omium.org>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@...aro.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@...il.com>,
Pasha Tatashin <pasha.tatashin@...een.com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] Add ftrace direct call for arm64
On 9/13/22 6:27 PM, Xu Kuohai wrote:
> This series adds ftrace direct call for arm64, which is required to attach
> bpf trampoline to fentry.
>
> Although there is no agreement on how to support ftrace direct call on arm64,
> no patch has been posted except the one I posted in [1], so this series
> continues the work of [1] with the addition of long jump support. Now ftrace
> direct call works regardless of the distance between the callsite and custom
> trampoline.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220518131638.3401509-2-xukuohai@huawei.com/
>
> v2:
> - Fix compile and runtime errors caused by ftrace_rec_arch_init
>
> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220913063146.74750-1-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com/
>
> Xu Kuohai (4):
> ftrace: Allow users to disable ftrace direct call
> arm64: ftrace: Support long jump for ftrace direct call
> arm64: ftrace: Add ftrace direct call support
> ftrace: Fix dead loop caused by direct call in ftrace selftest
Given there's just a tiny fraction touching BPF JIT and most are around core arm64,
it probably makes sense that this series goes via Catalin/Will through arm64 tree
instead of bpf-next if it looks good to them. Catalin/Will, thoughts (Ack + bpf-next
could work too, but I'd presume this just results in merge conflicts)?
> arch/arm64/Kconfig | 2 +
> arch/arm64/Makefile | 4 +
> arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h | 35 ++++--
> arch/arm64/include/asm/patching.h | 2 +
> arch/arm64/include/asm/ptrace.h | 6 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/asm-offsets.c | 1 +
> arch/arm64/kernel/entry-ftrace.S | 39 ++++--
> arch/arm64/kernel/ftrace.c | 198 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> arch/arm64/kernel/patching.c | 14 +++
> arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 4 +
> include/linux/ftrace.h | 2 +
> kernel/trace/Kconfig | 7 +-
> kernel/trace/ftrace.c | 9 +-
> kernel/trace/trace_selftest.c | 2 +
> 14 files changed, 296 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
Thanks,
Daniel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists