All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/18] libbpf: Permit 64bit relocation value
Date: Thu, 26 May 2022 11:54:42 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220526185442.2546806-1-yhs@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220526185432.2545879-1-yhs@fb.com>

Currently, the libbpf limits the relocation value to be 32bit
since all current relocations have such a limit. But with
BTF_KIND_ENUM64 support, the enum value could be 64bit.
So let us permit 64bit relocation value in libbpf.

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
---
 tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c | 49 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------
 tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.h |  4 ++--
 2 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
index ba4453dfd1ed..aea16343a8f1 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.c
@@ -583,7 +583,7 @@ static int bpf_core_spec_match(struct bpf_core_spec *local_spec,
 static int bpf_core_calc_field_relo(const char *prog_name,
 				    const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
 				    const struct bpf_core_spec *spec,
-				    __u32 *val, __u32 *field_sz, __u32 *type_id,
+				    __u64 *val, __u32 *field_sz, __u32 *type_id,
 				    bool *validate)
 {
 	const struct bpf_core_accessor *acc;
@@ -708,7 +708,7 @@ static int bpf_core_calc_field_relo(const char *prog_name,
 
 static int bpf_core_calc_type_relo(const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
 				   const struct bpf_core_spec *spec,
-				   __u32 *val, bool *validate)
+				   __u64 *val, bool *validate)
 {
 	__s64 sz;
 
@@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ static int bpf_core_calc_type_relo(const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
 
 static int bpf_core_calc_enumval_relo(const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
 				      const struct bpf_core_spec *spec,
-				      __u32 *val)
+				      __u64 *val)
 {
 	const struct btf_type *t;
 	const struct btf_enum *e;
@@ -929,7 +929,7 @@ int bpf_core_patch_insn(const char *prog_name, struct bpf_insn *insn,
 			int insn_idx, const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
 			int relo_idx, const struct bpf_core_relo_res *res)
 {
-	__u32 orig_val, new_val;
+	__u64 orig_val, new_val;
 	__u8 class;
 
 	class = BPF_CLASS(insn->code);
@@ -954,28 +954,30 @@ int bpf_core_patch_insn(const char *prog_name, struct bpf_insn *insn,
 		if (BPF_SRC(insn->code) != BPF_K)
 			return -EINVAL;
 		if (res->validate && insn->imm != orig_val) {
-			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (ALU/ALU64) value: got %u, exp %u -> %u\n",
+			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (ALU/ALU64) value: got %u, exp %llu -> %llu\n",
 				prog_name, relo_idx,
-				insn_idx, insn->imm, orig_val, new_val);
+				insn_idx, insn->imm, (unsigned long long)orig_val,
+				(unsigned long long)new_val);
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 		orig_val = insn->imm;
 		insn->imm = new_val;
-		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (ALU/ALU64) imm %u -> %u\n",
+		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (ALU/ALU64) imm %llu -> %llu\n",
 			 prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx,
-			 orig_val, new_val);
+			 (unsigned long long)orig_val, (unsigned long long)new_val);
 		break;
 	case BPF_LDX:
 	case BPF_ST:
 	case BPF_STX:
 		if (res->validate && insn->off != orig_val) {
-			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) value: got %u, exp %u -> %u\n",
-				prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, insn->off, orig_val, new_val);
+			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) value: got %u, exp %llu -> %llu\n",
+				prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, insn->off, (unsigned long long)orig_val,
+				(unsigned long long)new_val);
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 		if (new_val > SHRT_MAX) {
-			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) value too big: %u\n",
-				prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, new_val);
+			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) value too big: %llu\n",
+				prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, (unsigned long long)new_val);
 			return -ERANGE;
 		}
 		if (res->fail_memsz_adjust) {
@@ -987,8 +989,9 @@ int bpf_core_patch_insn(const char *prog_name, struct bpf_insn *insn,
 
 		orig_val = insn->off;
 		insn->off = new_val;
-		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) off %u -> %u\n",
-			 prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, orig_val, new_val);
+		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (LDX/ST/STX) off %llu -> %llu\n",
+			 prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx, (unsigned long long)orig_val,
+			 (unsigned long long)new_val);
 
 		if (res->new_sz != res->orig_sz) {
 			int insn_bytes_sz, insn_bpf_sz;
@@ -1026,18 +1029,18 @@ int bpf_core_patch_insn(const char *prog_name, struct bpf_insn *insn,
 
 		imm = insn[0].imm + ((__u64)insn[1].imm << 32);
 		if (res->validate && imm != orig_val) {
-			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (LDIMM64) value: got %llu, exp %u -> %u\n",
+			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: unexpected insn #%d (LDIMM64) value: got %llu, exp %llu -> %llu\n",
 				prog_name, relo_idx,
 				insn_idx, (unsigned long long)imm,
-				orig_val, new_val);
+				(unsigned long long)orig_val, (unsigned long long)new_val);
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 
 		insn[0].imm = new_val;
-		insn[1].imm = 0; /* currently only 32-bit values are supported */
-		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (LDIMM64) imm64 %llu -> %u\n",
+		insn[1].imm = new_val >> 32;
+		pr_debug("prog '%s': relo #%d: patched insn #%d (LDIMM64) imm64 %llu -> %llu\n",
 			 prog_name, relo_idx, insn_idx,
-			 (unsigned long long)imm, new_val);
+			 (unsigned long long)imm, (unsigned long long)new_val);
 		break;
 	}
 	default:
@@ -1261,10 +1264,12 @@ int bpf_core_calc_relo_insn(const char *prog_name,
 			 * decision and value, otherwise it's dangerous to
 			 * proceed due to ambiguity
 			 */
-			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: relocation decision ambiguity: %s %u != %s %u\n",
+			pr_warn("prog '%s': relo #%d: relocation decision ambiguity: %s %llu != %s %llu\n",
 				prog_name, relo_idx,
-				cand_res.poison ? "failure" : "success", cand_res.new_val,
-				targ_res->poison ? "failure" : "success", targ_res->new_val);
+				cand_res.poison ? "failure" : "success",
+				(unsigned long long)cand_res.new_val,
+				targ_res->poison ? "failure" : "success",
+				(unsigned long long)targ_res->new_val);
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.h b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.h
index 073039d8ca4f..7df0da082f2c 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/relo_core.h
@@ -46,9 +46,9 @@ struct bpf_core_spec {
 
 struct bpf_core_relo_res {
 	/* expected value in the instruction, unless validate == false */
-	__u32 orig_val;
+	__u64 orig_val;
 	/* new value that needs to be patched up to */
-	__u32 new_val;
+	__u64 new_val;
 	/* relocation unsuccessful, poison instruction, but don't fail load */
 	bool poison;
 	/* some relocations can't be validated against orig_val */
-- 
2.30.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2022-05-26 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-05-26 18:54 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/18] bpf: Add 64bit enum value support Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/18] bpf: Add btf enum64 support Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:54 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2022-05-26 18:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/18] libbpf: Fix an error in 64bit relocation value computation Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/18] libbpf: Refactor btf__add_enum() for future code sharing Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:54 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/18] libbpf: Add enum64 parsing and new enum64 public API Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/18] libbpf: Add enum64 deduplication support Yonghong Song
2022-05-31 23:50   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-06-01 18:31     ` Yonghong Song
2022-06-01 21:52       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/18] libbpf: Add enum64 support for btf_dump Yonghong Song
2022-05-31 23:57   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-06-01 19:09     ` Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/18] libbpf: Add enum64 sanitization Yonghong Song
2022-05-31 23:59   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/18] libbpf: Add enum64 support for bpf linking Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/18] libbpf: Add enum64 relocation support Yonghong Song
2022-06-01  0:07   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-06-01 19:14     ` Yonghong Song
2022-06-01 21:53       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/18] bpftool: Add btf enum64 support Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/18] selftests/bpf: Fix selftests failure Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/18] selftests/bpf: Test new enum kflag and enum64 API functions Yonghong Song
2022-06-01  0:08   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-06-01 19:15     ` Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 14/18] selftests/bpf: Add BTF_KIND_ENUM64 unit tests Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 15/18] selftests/bpf: Test BTF_KIND_ENUM64 for deduplication Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 16/18] selftests/bpf: Add a test for enum64 value relocations Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 17/18] selftests/bpf: Clarify llvm dependency with possible selftest failures Yonghong Song
2022-05-26 18:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 18/18] docs/bpf: Update documentation for BTF_KIND_ENUM64 support Yonghong Song

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=20220526185442.2546806-1-yhs@fb.com \
    --to=yhs@fb.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.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.