From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: bjorn.topel@gmail.com, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
ast@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: hch@infradead.org, palmer@sifive.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] Add RISC-V (RV64G) BPF JIT
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2019 17:05:46 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8d1cb0d4-c781-3063-49f5-ce788f141b9f@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190205124125.5553-1-bjorn.topel@gmail.com>
On 02/05/2019 01:41 PM, bjorn.topel@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com>
>
> Hi!
>
> This v2 series adds an RV64G BPF JIT to the kernel.
>
> At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support
> CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES (Patrick Stählin sent out an RFC last year), which
> means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests
> involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
> BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes.
>
> The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB).
>
> Test results:
> # modprobe test_bpf
> test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed]
>
> # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
> # ./test_verifier
> ...
> Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED
>
> Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with
> CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise
> many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped.
>
> CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y:
> # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
> # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align'
> 0
>
> No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS:
> # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
> # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align'
> 59
>
> The two failing test_verifier tests are:
> "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1"
> "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs"
>
> This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests.
> All tests where done on QEMU emulator version 3.1.50
> (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106). I'll test it on real hardware, when I get
> access to it.
>
> I'm routing this patch via bpf-next/netdev mailing list (after a
> conversation with Palmer at FOSDEM), mainly because the other JITs
> went that path.
>
> Again, thanks for all the comments!
>
> Cheers,
> Björn
>
> v1 -> v2:
> * Added JMP32 support. (Daniel)
> * Add RISC-V to Documentation/sysctl/net.txt. (Daniel)
> * Fixed seen_call() asymmetry. (Daniel)
> * Fixed broken bpf_flush_icache() range. (Daniel)
> * Added alignment annotations to some selftests.
>
> RFCv1 -> v1:
> * Cleaned up the Kconfig and net/Makefile. (Christoph)
> * Removed the entry-stub and squashed the build/config changes to be
> part of the JIT implementation. (Christoph)
> * Simplified the register tracking code. (Daniel)
> * Removed unused macros. (Daniel)
> * Added myself as maintainer and updated documentation. (Daniel)
> * Removed HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. (Christoph, Palmer)
> * Added tail-calls and cleaned up the code.
>
>
> Björn Töpel (4):
> bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G
> MAINTAINERS: add RISC-V BPF JIT maintainer
> bpf, doc: add RISC-V JIT to BPF documentation
> selftests/bpf: add "any alignment" annotation for some tests
>
> Documentation/networking/filter.txt | 16 +-
> Documentation/sysctl/net.txt | 1 +
> MAINTAINERS | 6 +
> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 1 +
> arch/riscv/Makefile | 2 +-
> arch/riscv/net/Makefile | 1 +
> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 1602 +++++++++++++++++
> .../selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_sk_msg.c | 1 +
> .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c | 1 +
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c | 22 +
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jset.c | 2 +
> .../selftests/bpf/verifier/spill_fill.c | 1 +
> .../selftests/bpf/verifier/spin_lock.c | 2 +
> .../selftests/bpf/verifier/value_ptr_arith.c | 4 +
> 14 files changed, 1654 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/net/Makefile
> create mode 100644 arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
Applied, thanks!
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-02-05 16:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-02-05 12:41 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] Add RISC-V (RV64G) BPF JIT bjorn.topel
2019-02-05 12:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/4] bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G bjorn.topel
2019-02-05 12:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] MAINTAINERS: add RISC-V BPF JIT maintainer bjorn.topel
2019-02-05 12:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/4] bpf, doc: add RISC-V JIT to BPF documentation bjorn.topel
2019-02-05 12:41 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/4] selftests/bpf: add "any alignment" annotation for some tests bjorn.topel
2019-02-05 16:05 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
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=8d1cb0d4-c781-3063-49f5-ce788f141b9f@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.topel@gmail.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@sifive.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).