All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	songliubraving@fb.com, andriin@fb.com, daniel@iogearbox.net,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
	ast@kernel.org, zlim.lnx@gmail.com, kpsingh@chromium.org,
	yhs@fb.com, will@kernel.org, kafai@fb.com, sfr@canb.auug.org.au,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/1] arm64: bpf: Add BPF exception tables
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 16:22:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200730142213.GB1529030@myrica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200730122855.GA3773@lca.pw>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1499 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 08:28:56AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 05:21:26PM +0200, Jean-Philippe Brucker 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 arm64 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.
> > 
> > To keep the compact exception table entry format, inspect the pc in
> > fixup_exception(). A more generic solution would add a "handler" field
> > to the table entry, like on x86 and s390.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> 
> This will fail to compile on arm64,
> 
> https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/arm64.config
> 
> arch/arm64/mm/extable.o: In function `fixup_exception':
> arch/arm64/mm/extable.c:19: undefined reference to `arm64_bpf_fixup_exception'

Thanks for the report, I attached a fix. Daniel, can I squash it and
resend as v2 or is it too late?

I'd be more confident if my patches sat a little longer on the list so
arm64 folks have a chance to review them. This isn't my first silly
mistake...

Thanks,
Jean

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-arm64-bpf-Fix-build-for-CONFIG_BPF_JIT.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1688 bytes --]

From 17d0f041b57903cb2657dde15559cd1923498337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:45:44 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: Fix build for !CONFIG_BPF_JIT

Add a stub for arm64_bpf_fixup_exception() when CONFIG_BPF_JIT isn't
enabled, and avoid the fixup in this case.

Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h | 9 +++++++++
 arch/arm64/mm/extable.c          | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
index bcee40df1586..840a35ed92ec 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
@@ -22,8 +22,17 @@ struct exception_table_entry
 
 #define ARCH_HAS_RELATIVE_EXTABLE
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
 int arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
 			      struct pt_regs *regs);
+#else /* !CONFIG_BPF_JIT */
+static inline
+int arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
+			      struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
+#endif /* !CONFIG_BPF_JIT */
 
 extern int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs);
 #endif
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
index 1f42991cacdd..eee1732ab6cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	if (!fixup)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) &&
+	    regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
 	    regs->pc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END)
 		return arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs);
 
-- 
2.27.0


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To: Qian Cai <cai@lca.pw>
Cc: sfr@canb.auug.org.au, songliubraving@fb.com,
	daniel@iogearbox.net, catalin.marinas@arm.com,
	john.fastabend@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, will@kernel.org,
	linux-next@vger.kernel.org, zlim.lnx@gmail.com,
	kpsingh@chromium.org, yhs@fb.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	andriin@fb.com, kafai@fb.com,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/1] arm64: bpf: Add BPF exception tables
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 16:22:13 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200730142213.GB1529030@myrica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200730122855.GA3773@lca.pw>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1499 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 30, 2020 at 08:28:56AM -0400, Qian Cai wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 05:21:26PM +0200, Jean-Philippe Brucker 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 arm64 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.
> > 
> > To keep the compact exception table entry format, inspect the pc in
> > fixup_exception(). A more generic solution would add a "handler" field
> > to the table entry, like on x86 and s390.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> 
> This will fail to compile on arm64,
> 
> https://gitlab.com/cailca/linux-mm/-/blob/master/arm64.config
> 
> arch/arm64/mm/extable.o: In function `fixup_exception':
> arch/arm64/mm/extable.c:19: undefined reference to `arm64_bpf_fixup_exception'

Thanks for the report, I attached a fix. Daniel, can I squash it and
resend as v2 or is it too late?

I'd be more confident if my patches sat a little longer on the list so
arm64 folks have a chance to review them. This isn't my first silly
mistake...

Thanks,
Jean

[-- Attachment #2: 0001-arm64-bpf-Fix-build-for-CONFIG_BPF_JIT.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 1688 bytes --]

From 17d0f041b57903cb2657dde15559cd1923498337 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 14:45:44 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: Fix build for !CONFIG_BPF_JIT

Add a stub for arm64_bpf_fixup_exception() when CONFIG_BPF_JIT isn't
enabled, and avoid the fixup in this case.

Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
---
 arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h | 9 +++++++++
 arch/arm64/mm/extable.c          | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
index bcee40df1586..840a35ed92ec 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
+++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/extable.h
@@ -22,8 +22,17 @@ struct exception_table_entry
 
 #define ARCH_HAS_RELATIVE_EXTABLE
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT
 int arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
 			      struct pt_regs *regs);
+#else /* !CONFIG_BPF_JIT */
+static inline
+int arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex,
+			      struct pt_regs *regs)
+{
+	return 0;
+}
+#endif /* !CONFIG_BPF_JIT */
 
 extern int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs);
 #endif
diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
index 1f42991cacdd..eee1732ab6cd 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/mm/extable.c
@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
 	if (!fixup)
 		return 0;
 
-	if (regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
+	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) &&
+	    regs->pc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START &&
 	    regs->pc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END)
 		return arm64_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs);
 
-- 
2.27.0


[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-30 14:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-28 15:21 [PATCH bpf-next 0/1] arm64: Add BPF exception tables Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-28 15:21 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-28 15:21 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/1] arm64: bpf: " Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-28 15:21   ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-29 17:28   ` Song Liu
2020-07-29 17:28     ` Song Liu
2020-07-29 21:29     ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-07-29 21:29       ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-07-30  8:28       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-30  8:28         ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-30 12:28   ` Qian Cai
2020-07-30 12:28     ` Qian Cai
2020-07-30 14:22     ` Jean-Philippe Brucker [this message]
2020-07-30 14:22       ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-30 19:47       ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-07-30 19:47         ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-07-30 21:14         ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-30 21:14           ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2020-07-30 22:45           ` Daniel Borkmann
2020-07-30 22:45             ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-06-09 12:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/1] arm64: " Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-09 12:04   ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-11  0:12   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-11  0:12     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-17  6:58     ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-17  6:58       ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-18 16:34       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-18 16:34         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-22  7:10         ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-22  7:10           ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-22 11:00         ` [PATCH] x86 bpf: Fix extable offset calculation Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-25  4:01           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-06-25  6:22             ` Ravi Bangoria
2021-06-25 15:07               ` Alexei Starovoitov

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200730142213.GB1529030@myrica \
    --to=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
    --cc=andriin@fb.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=cai@lca.pw \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@chromium.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-next@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sfr@canb.auug.org.au \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@fb.com \
    --cc=zlim.lnx@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.