[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87qzs2imh3.fsf@cloudflare.com>
Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2026 20:12:56 +0100
From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
To: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller"
<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub
Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Alexei
Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, John Fastabend
<john.fastabend@...il.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Simon
Horman <horms@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Eduard
Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song
<yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Hao Luo
<haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, kernel-team
<kernel-team@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/16] bpf: Realign skb metadata for TC
progs using data_meta
On Tue, Jan 06, 2026 at 09:46 AM -08, Amery Hung wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 9:36 AM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com> wrote:
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> @@ -21806,6 +21806,14 @@ static int convert_ctx_accesses(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>> env->prog = new_prog;
>> delta += cnt - 1;
>>
>> + /* gen_prologue emits function calls with target address
>> + * relative to __bpf_call_base. Skip patch_call_imm fixup.
>> + */
>> + for (i = 0; i < cnt - 1; i++) {
>> + if (bpf_helper_call(&env->prog->insnsi[i]))
>> + env->insn_aux_data[i].finalized_call = true;
>> + }
>> +
>> ret = add_kfunc_in_insns(env, insn_buf, cnt - 1);
>
> And then we can get rid of this function as there is no use case for
> having a new kfunc in gen_{pro,epi}logue.
Happy to convert bpf_{qdisc,testmod} gen_{pro,epi}logue to use
BPF_EMIT_CALL instead of BPF_CALL_KFUNC.
If it's alright with you, I'd like to kill kfunc support in
{pro,epi}logue as a follow up.
Looks like there will be a bit of churn in selftests to remove the
coverage. And this series is getting quite long.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists