From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ys114321@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net, sdf@fomichev.me,
davem@davemloft.net, ast@kernel.org,
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: make PT_REGS_* work in userspace
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 16:29:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190711142930.68809-4-iii@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190711142930.68809-1-iii@linux.ibm.com>
Right now, on certain architectures, these macros are usable only with
kernel headers. This patch makes it possible to use them with userspace
headers and, as a consequence, not only in BPF samples, but also in BPF
selftests.
On s390, provide the forward declaration of struct pt_regs and cast it
to user_pt_regs in PT_REGS_* macros. This is necessary, because instead
of the full struct pt_regs, s390 exposes only its first member
user_pt_regs to userspace, and bpf_helpers.h is used with both userspace
(in selftests) and kernel (in samples) headers. It was added in commit
466698e654e8 ("s390/bpf: correct broken uapi for
BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT program type").
Ditto on arm64.
On x86, provide userspace versions of PT_REGS_* macros. Unlike s390 and
arm64, x86 provides struct pt_regs to both userspace and kernel, however,
with different member names.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 75 +++++++++++++++++------
1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
index 73071a94769a..27090d94afb6 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
@@ -358,6 +358,7 @@ static int (*bpf_skb_adjust_room)(void *ctx, __s32 len_diff, __u32 mode,
#if defined(bpf_target_x86)
+#ifdef __KERNEL__
#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->di)
#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->si)
#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->dx)
@@ -368,19 +369,49 @@ static int (*bpf_skb_adjust_room)(void *ctx, __s32 len_diff, __u32 mode,
#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->ax)
#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->sp)
#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->ip)
+#else
+#ifdef __i386__
+/* i386 kernel is built with -mregparm=3 */
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->eax)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->edx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->ecx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) 0
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) 0
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->esp)
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->ebp)
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->eax)
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->esp)
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->eip)
+#else
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->rdi)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->rsi)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->rdx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) ((x)->rcx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) ((x)->r8)
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->rsp)
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->rbp)
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->rax)
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->rsp)
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->rip)
+#endif
+#endif
#elif defined(bpf_target_s390)
-#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->gprs[2])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->gprs[3])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->gprs[4])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) ((x)->gprs[5])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) ((x)->gprs[6])
-#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->gprs[14])
-#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->gprs[11]) /* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
-#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->gprs[2])
-#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->gprs[15])
-#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->psw.addr)
+/* s390 provides user_pt_regs instead of struct pt_regs to userspace */
+struct pt_regs;
+#define PT_REGS_S390 const volatile user_pt_regs
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[2])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[3])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[4])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[5])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[6])
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[14])
+/* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[11])
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[2])
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->gprs[15])
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) (((PT_REGS_S390 *)(x))->psw.addr)
#elif defined(bpf_target_arm)
@@ -397,16 +428,20 @@ static int (*bpf_skb_adjust_room)(void *ctx, __s32 len_diff, __u32 mode,
#elif defined(bpf_target_arm64)
-#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->regs[0])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->regs[1])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->regs[2])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) ((x)->regs[3])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) ((x)->regs[4])
-#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->regs[30])
-#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->regs[29]) /* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
-#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->regs[0])
-#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->sp)
-#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->pc)
+/* arm64 provides struct user_pt_regs instead of struct pt_regs to userspace */
+struct pt_regs;
+#define PT_REGS_ARM64 const volatile struct user_pt_regs
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[0])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[1])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[2])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[3])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[4])
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[30])
+/* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[29])
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->regs[0])
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->sp)
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) (((PT_REGS_ARM64 *)(x))->pc)
#elif defined(bpf_target_mips)
--
2.21.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-11 14:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-11 14:29 [PATCH v4 bpf-next 0/4] selftests/bpf: fix compiling loop{1,2,3}.c on s390 Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 1/4] selftests/bpf: compile progs with -D__TARGET_ARCH_$(SRCARCH) Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-12 0:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-12 8:59 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-12 17:28 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 2/4] selftests/bpf: fix s930 -> s390 typo Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-12 0:50 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 14:29 ` Ilya Leoshkevich [this message]
2019-07-12 0:49 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: make PT_REGS_* work in userspace Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 14:29 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: fix compiling loop{1,2,3}.c on s390 Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-11 20:35 ` [PATCH v4 bpf-next 0/4] " Stanislav Fomichev
2019-07-12 8:55 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-12 13:44 ` Daniel Borkmann
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=20190711142930.68809-4-iii@linux.ibm.com \
--to=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=ys114321@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.