From: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: introduce bpf_prog_pack allocator
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2022 14:25:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW4K+oDsytLvz4n44Fe3Pbjmpu6tnCk63A-UVxCZpz_rjg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQL8-Hq=g3u65AOoOcB5y-LcOEA4wwMb1Ep0usWdCCSAcA@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 12:00 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:21 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 9:21 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:27 AM Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Are arches expected to allocate rw buffers in different ways? If not,
> > > > > I would consider putting this into the common code as well. Then
> > > > > arch-specific code would do something like
> > > > >
> > > > > header = bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack(size, &prg_buf, &prg_addr, ...);
> > > > > ...
> > > > > /*
> > > > > * Generate code into prg_buf, the code should assume that its first
> > > > > * byte is located at prg_addr.
> > > > > */
> > > > > ...
> > > > > bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack(header, prg_buf);
> > > > >
> > > > > where bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack() would copy prg_buf to header and
> > > > > free it.
> > >
> > > It feels right, but bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack() sounds 100% arch
> > > dependent. The only thing it will do is perform a copy via text_poke.
> > > What else?
> > >
> > > > I think this should work.
> > > >
> > > > We will need an API like: bpf_arch_text_copy, which uses text_poke_copy()
> > > > for x86_64 and s390_kernel_write() for x390. We will use bpf_arch_text_copy
> > > > to
> > > > 1) write header->size;
> > > > 2) do finally copy in bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack().
> > >
> > > we can combine all text_poke operations into one.
> > >
> > > Can we add an 'image' pointer into struct bpf_binary_header ?
> >
> > There is a 4-byte hole in bpf_binary_header. How about we put
> > image_offset there? Actually we only need 2 bytes for offset.
> >
> > > Then do:
> > > int bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack(size, &ro_hdr, &rw_hdr);
> > >
> > > ro_hdr->image would be the address used to compute offsets by JIT.
> >
> > If we only do one text_poke(), we cannot write ro_hdr->image yet. We
> > can use ro_hdr + rw_hdr->image_offset instead.
>
> Good points.
> Maybe let's go back to Ilya's suggestion and return 4 pointers
> from bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack ?
How about we use image_offset, like:
struct bpf_binary_header {
u32 size;
u32 image_offset;
u8 image[] __aligned(BPF_IMAGE_ALIGNMENT);
};
Then we can use
image = (void *)header + header->image_offset;
In this way, we will only have two output pointers.
>
> > > rw_hdr->image would point to kvmalloc-ed area for emitting insns.
> > > rw_hdr->size would already be populated.
> > >
> > > The JITs would write insns into rw_hdr->image including 'int 3' insns.
> > > At the end the JIT will do text_poke_copy(ro_hdr, rw_hdr, rw_hdr->size);
> > > That would be the only copy that will transfer everything into final
> > > location.
> > > Then kvfree(rw_hdr)
> >
> > The only problem is the asymmetry of allocating rw_hdr from bpf/core.c,
> > and freeing it from arch/bpf_jit_comp.c. But it doesn't bother me too much.
>
> Indeed. Asymmetry needs to be fixed.
> Let's then pass 4 pointers back into
> bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack()
> which will call arch dependent weak function to do text_poke_copy
> or use default __weak function that returns eopnotsupp
> and then kvfree the rw_hdr ?
> I'd like to avoid callbacks. imo __weak is easier to follow.
Yeah, I also like __weak function better.
Thanks,
Song
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-25 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-01-21 19:49 [PATCH v6 bpf-next 0/7] bpf_prog_pack allocator Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 1/7] x86/Kconfig: select HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMALLOC with HAVE_ARCH_HUGE_VMAP Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 2/7] bpf: use bytes instead of pages for bpf_jit_[charge|uncharge]_modmem Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: use size instead of pages in bpf_binary_header Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: add a pointer of bpf_binary_header to bpf_prog Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 5/7] x86/alternative: introduce text_poke_copy Song Liu
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: introduce bpf_prog_pack allocator Song Liu
2022-01-21 23:55 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-22 0:23 ` Song Liu
2022-01-22 0:41 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-22 1:01 ` Song Liu
2022-01-22 1:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-22 1:30 ` Song Liu
2022-01-22 2:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-23 1:03 ` Song Liu
2022-01-24 12:29 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2022-01-24 18:27 ` Song Liu
2022-01-25 5:21 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-25 7:21 ` Song Liu
2022-01-25 19:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-25 22:25 ` Song Liu [this message]
2022-01-25 22:48 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-25 23:09 ` Song Liu
2022-01-26 0:38 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-26 0:50 ` Song Liu
2022-01-26 1:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-26 1:28 ` Song Liu
2022-01-26 1:31 ` Song Liu
2022-01-26 1:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-24 12:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2022-01-21 19:49 ` [PATCH v6 bpf-next 7/7] bpf, x86_64: use " Song Liu
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=CAPhsuW4K+oDsytLvz4n44Fe3Pbjmpu6tnCk63A-UVxCZpz_rjg@mail.gmail.com \
--to=song@kernel.org \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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).