[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1553623539-15474-3-git-send-email-jiong.wang@netronome.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 18:05:25 +0000
From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
To: alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, daniel@...earbox.net
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
oss-drivers@...ronome.com, Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC bpf-next 02/16] bpf: refactor propagate_live implementation
Some code inside current implementation of "propagate_liveness" is a little
bit verbose.
This patch refactor them so the code looks more simple and more clear.
The redundant usage of "vparent->frame[vstate->curframe]" is removed as we
are here. It is safe to do this because "state_equal" has guaranteed that
vstate->curframe must be equal with vparent->curframe.
Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@...ronome.com>
---
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 6cc8c38..245bb3c 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -6050,6 +6050,22 @@ static bool states_equal(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return true;
}
+static int propagate_liveness_reg(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ struct bpf_reg_state *reg,
+ struct bpf_reg_state *parent_reg, u8 flag)
+{
+ int err;
+
+ if (parent_reg->live & flag || !(reg->live & flag))
+ return 0;
+
+ err = mark_reg_read(env, reg, parent_reg);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+
+ return 1;
+}
+
/* A write screens off any subsequent reads; but write marks come from the
* straight-line code between a state and its parent. When we arrive at an
* equivalent state (jump target or such) we didn't arrive by the straight-line
@@ -6061,8 +6077,9 @@ static int propagate_liveness(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
const struct bpf_verifier_state *vstate,
struct bpf_verifier_state *vparent)
{
- int i, frame, err = 0;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs, *parent_regs;
struct bpf_func_state *state, *parent;
+ int i, frame, err = 0;
if (vparent->curframe != vstate->curframe) {
WARN(1, "propagate_live: parent frame %d current frame %d\n",
@@ -6071,16 +6088,13 @@ static int propagate_liveness(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
}
/* Propagate read liveness of registers... */
BUILD_BUG_ON(BPF_REG_FP + 1 != MAX_BPF_REG);
+ parent_regs = vparent->frame[vparent->curframe]->regs;
+ regs = vstate->frame[vstate->curframe]->regs;
/* We don't need to worry about FP liveness because it's read-only */
for (i = 0; i < BPF_REG_FP; i++) {
- if (vparent->frame[vparent->curframe]->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ)
- continue;
- if (vstate->frame[vstate->curframe]->regs[i].live & REG_LIVE_READ) {
- err = mark_reg_read(env, &vstate->frame[vstate->curframe]->regs[i],
- &vparent->frame[vstate->curframe]->regs[i]);
- if (err)
- return err;
- }
+ err = propagate_liveness_reg(env, ®s[i], &parent_regs[i]);
+ if (err < 0)
+ return err;
}
/* ... and stack slots */
@@ -6089,11 +6103,13 @@ static int propagate_liveness(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
parent = vparent->frame[frame];
for (i = 0; i < state->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE &&
i < parent->allocated_stack / BPF_REG_SIZE; i++) {
- if (parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ)
- continue;
- if (state->stack[i].spilled_ptr.live & REG_LIVE_READ)
- mark_reg_read(env, &state->stack[i].spilled_ptr,
- &parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr);
+ struct bpf_reg_state *parent_reg, *reg;
+
+ parent_reg = &parent->stack[i].spilled_ptr;
+ reg = &state->stack[i].spilled_ptr;
+ err = propagate_liveness_reg(env, reg, parent_reg);
+ if (err < 0)
+ return err;
}
}
return err;
--
2.7.4
Powered by blists - more mailing lists