[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20251215023200.GB141785@chenghao-pc>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025 10:32:00 +0800
From: Chenghao Duan <duanchenghao@...inos.cn>
To: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn>
Cc: hengqi.chen@...il.com, chenhuacai@...nel.org, kernel@...0n.name,
zhangtianyang@...ngson.cn, masahiroy@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, loongarch@...ts.linux.dev,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, youling.tang@...ux.dev, jianghaoran@...inos.cn,
vincent.mc.li@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] LoongArch: BPF: Enhance trampoline support for
kernel and module tracing
On Sun, Dec 14, 2025 at 08:36:16PM +0800, Tiezhu Yang wrote:
> On 12/12/25 17:11, Chenghao Duan wrote:
> > This patch addresses two main issues in the LoongArch BPF trampoline
> > implementation:
> >
> > 1. BPF-to-BPF call handling:
> > - Modify the build_prologue function to ensure that the value of the
> > return address register ra is saved to t0 before entering the
> > trampoline operation.
> > - This ensures that the return address handling logic is accurate and
> > error-free when a BPF program calls another BPF program.
> >
> > 2. Enable Module Function Tracing Support:
> > - Remove the previous restrictions that blocked the tracing of kernel
> > module functions.
> > - Fix the issue that previously caused kernel lockups when attempting
> > to trace module functions
> >
> > 3. Related Function Optimizations:
> > - Adjust the jump offset of tail calls to ensure correct instruction
> > alignment.
> > - Enhance the bpf_arch_text_poke() function to enable accurate location
> > of BPF program entry points.
> > - Refine the trampoline return logic to ensure that the register data
> > is correct when returning to both the traced function and the parent
> > function.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Chenghao Duan <duanchenghao@...inos.cn>
>
> As described in the commit message, your changes include many kinds
> of contents, thanks for the fixes and optimizations.
>
> In order to avoid introducing bugs in the middle, please separate each
> logical change into a separate patch, each patch should make an easily
> understood change that can be verified by reviewers, each patch should
> be justifiable on its own merits.
>
> The current patch #4 can be put after the current patch #2 as a
> preparation for the bpf patches.
>
Got it. I will incorporate your suggestions in the next version.
> Furthermore, it would be better to put the related test cases in the
> commit message of each patch rather than in the cover letter, so that
> it can be verified easily to know what this patch affected and can be
> recorded in the git log.
I fully agree with your suggestions. In fact, the current three patches
(excluding 0002-ftrace-samples-xxx.patch) are all fixes for the failed
test cases of module_attach. The test items included in the cover letter
of 0000-xxx.patch are intended to verify that the trampoline-related
test cases can pass after the current changes. I will follow your advice
and place the relevant test cases in the commit message of the
corresponding patches in the next version.
Chenghao
>
> And also please add Fixes tag for each patch if possible.
>
> Thanks,
> Tiezhu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists