From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Add __bpf_kfunc tag for marking kernel functions as kfuncs
Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2023 15:17:54 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQJJaTXa8Y-aGctrBTjasKzsMDq4nW7Na5X3i8oobpT9NQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y7jUaDD9V556Px3b@maniforge.lan>
On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 6:09 PM David Vernet <void@manifault.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 06, 2023 at 05:04:02PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jan 6, 2023 at 11:51 AM David Vernet <void@manifault.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > kfuncs are functions defined in the kernel, which may be invoked by BPF
> > > programs. They may or may not also be used as regular kernel functions,
> > > implying that they may be static (in which case the compiler could e.g.
> > > inline it away), or it could have external linkage, but potentially be
> > > elided in an LTO build if a function is observed to never be used, and
> > > is stripped from the final kernel binary.
> > >
> > > We therefore require some convenience macro that kfunc developers can
> > > use just add to their kfuncs, and which will prevent all of the above
> > > issues from happening. This is in contrast with what we have today,
> > > where some kfunc definitions have "noinline", some have "__used", and
> > > others are static and have neither.
> > >
> > > In addition to providing the obvious correctness benefits, having such a
> > > macro / tag also provides the following advantages:
> > >
> > > - Giving an easy and intuitive thing to query for if people are looking
> > > for kfuncs, as Christoph suggested at the kernel maintainers summit
> > > (https://lwn.net/Articles/908464/). This is currently possible by
> > > grepping for BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, but having something more self
> > > describing would be useful as well.
> > >
> > > - In the future, the tag can be expanded with other useful things such
> > > as the ability to suppress -Wmissing-prototype for the kfuncs rather
> > > than requiring developers to surround the kfunc with __diags to
> > > suppress the warning (this requires compiler support that as far as I
> > > know currently does not exist).
> >
> > Have you considered doing bpf_kfunc_start/bpf_kfunc_end ?
> > The former would include:
> > __diag_push(); __diag_ignore_all(); __used noinline
>
> Yeah that's certainly an option. The downside is that all functions
> within scope of the __diag_push() will be affected, and sometimes we mix
> kfuncs with non-kfuncs (including e.g. static helper functions that are
> used by the kfuncs themselves). -Wmissing-prototypes isn't a big deal,
> but __used and noinline are kind of unfortunate. Not a big deal though,
> it'll just result in a few extra __bpf_kfuncs_start() and
> __bpf_kfuncs_end() sprinkled throughout to avoid them being included.
> The upside is of course that we can get rid of the __diag_push()'es we
> currently have to prevent -Wmissing-prototypes.
I meant to use bpf_kfunc_start/bpf_kfunc_end around every kfunc.
Ideally bpf_kfunc_start would be on the same line as func proto
for nice grepping.
Maybe it's an overkill.
Maybe 3 macroses then?
bpf_kfunc_start to hide __diag
bpf_kfunc on the proto line
bpf_kfunc_end to finish __diag_pop
> Wdyt? I do like the idea of getting rid of those ugly __diag_push()'es.
> And we could always go back to using a __bpf_kfunc macro if and when
> compilers ever support using attributes to ignore warnings for specific
> functions.
>
> >
> > Also how about using bpf_kfunc on the same line ?
> > Then 'git grep' will be easier.
>
> Sure, if we keep this approach I'll do this in v2.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-08 23:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-06 19:51 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Annotate kfuncs with new __bpf_kfunc macro David Vernet
2023-01-06 19:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Add __bpf_kfunc tag for marking kernel functions as kfuncs David Vernet
2023-01-07 1:04 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-07 2:09 ` David Vernet
2023-01-08 23:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2023-01-09 12:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-01-09 17:05 ` David Vernet
2023-01-10 2:21 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-06 19:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: Document usage of the new __bpf_kfunc macro David Vernet
2023-01-06 19:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf: Add __bpf_kfunc tag to all kfuncs David Vernet
2023-01-07 0:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] Annotate kfuncs with new __bpf_kfunc macro Stanislav Fomichev
2023-01-07 5:27 ` David Vernet
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=CAADnVQJJaTXa8Y-aGctrBTjasKzsMDq4nW7Na5X3i8oobpT9NQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=void@manifault.com \
--cc=yhs@meta.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).