From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, kernel-team@fb.com, song@kernel.org,
joannelkoong@gmail.com
Cc: eddyz87@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/5] bpf: Inline calls to bpf_loop when callback is known
Date: Wed, 8 Jun 2022 22:26:28 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220608192630.3710333-4-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220608192630.3710333-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
Calls to `bpf_loop` are replaced with direct loops to avoid
indirection. E.g. the following:
bpf_loop(10, foo, NULL, 0);
Is replaced by equivalent of the following:
for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
foo(i, NULL);
This transformation could be applied when:
- callback is known and does not change during program execution;
- flags passed to `bpf_loop` are always zero.
Inlining logic works as follows:
- During execution simulation function `update_loop_inline_state`
tracks the following information for each `bpf_loop` call
instruction:
- is callback known and constant?
- are flags constant and zero?
- Function `optimize_bpf_loop` increases stack depth for functions
where `bpf_loop` calls can be inlined and invokes `inline_bpf_loop`
to apply the inlining. The additional stack space is used to spill
registers R6, R7 and R8. These registers are used as loop counter,
loop maximal bound and callback context parameter;
Measurements using `benchs/run_bench_bpf_loop.sh` inside QEMU / KVM on
i7-4710HQ CPU show a drop in latency from 14 ns/op to 2 ns/op.
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
include/linux/bpf.h | 3 +
include/linux/bpf_verifier.h | 12 +++
kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c | 9 +-
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 168 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
4 files changed, 183 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 8e6092d0ea95..3c75ede138b5 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -1236,6 +1236,9 @@ struct bpf_array {
#define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS 1000000 /* yes. 1M insns */
#define MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT 33
+/* Maximum number of loops for bpf_loop */
+#define BPF_MAX_LOOPS BIT(23)
+
#define BPF_F_ACCESS_MASK (BPF_F_RDONLY | \
BPF_F_RDONLY_PROG | \
BPF_F_WRONLY | \
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
index e8439f6cbe57..5df09fc46043 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf_verifier.h
@@ -344,6 +344,14 @@ struct bpf_verifier_state_list {
int miss_cnt, hit_cnt;
};
+struct bpf_loop_inline_state {
+ bool initialized; /* set to true upon first entry */
+ bool fit_for_inline; /* true if callback function is the same
+ * at each call and flags are always zero
+ */
+ u32 callback_subprogno; /* valid when fit_for_inline is true */
+};
+
/* Possible states for alu_state member. */
#define BPF_ALU_SANITIZE_SRC (1U << 0)
#define BPF_ALU_SANITIZE_DST (1U << 1)
@@ -373,6 +381,10 @@ struct bpf_insn_aux_data {
u32 mem_size; /* mem_size for non-struct typed var */
};
} btf_var;
+ /* if instruction is a call to bpf_loop this field tracks
+ * the state of the relevant registers to make decision about inlining
+ */
+ struct bpf_loop_inline_state loop_inline_state;
};
u64 map_key_state; /* constant (32 bit) key tracking for maps */
int ctx_field_size; /* the ctx field size for load insn, maybe 0 */
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
index d5d96ceca105..7e8fd49406f6 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c
@@ -723,9 +723,6 @@ const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_for_each_map_elem_proto = {
.arg4_type = ARG_ANYTHING,
};
-/* maximum number of loops */
-#define MAX_LOOPS BIT(23)
-
BPF_CALL_4(bpf_loop, u32, nr_loops, void *, callback_fn, void *, callback_ctx,
u64, flags)
{
@@ -733,9 +730,13 @@ BPF_CALL_4(bpf_loop, u32, nr_loops, void *, callback_fn, void *, callback_ctx,
u64 ret;
u32 i;
+ /* Note: these safety checks are also verified when bpf_loop
+ * is inlined, be careful to modify this code in sync. See
+ * function verifier.c:inline_bpf_loop.
+ */
if (flags)
return -EINVAL;
- if (nr_loops > MAX_LOOPS)
+ if (nr_loops > BPF_MAX_LOOPS)
return -E2BIG;
for (i = 0; i < nr_loops; i++) {
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 2d2872682278..81291dfa63cf 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -7103,6 +7103,31 @@ static int check_get_func_ip(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
+static struct bpf_insn_aux_data *cur_aux(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+{
+ return &env->insn_aux_data[env->insn_idx];
+}
+
+void update_loop_inline_state(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 subprogno)
+{
+ struct bpf_loop_inline_state *state = &cur_aux(env)->loop_inline_state;
+ struct bpf_reg_state *regs = cur_regs(env);
+ struct bpf_reg_state *flags_reg = ®s[BPF_REG_4];
+
+ int flags_is_zero =
+ register_is_const(flags_reg) && flags_reg->var_off.value == 0;
+
+ if (state->initialized) {
+ state->fit_for_inline &=
+ flags_is_zero &&
+ state->callback_subprogno == subprogno;
+ } else {
+ state->initialized = 1;
+ state->fit_for_inline = flags_is_zero;
+ state->callback_subprogno = subprogno;
+ }
+}
+
static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
int *insn_idx_p)
{
@@ -7255,6 +7280,7 @@ static int check_helper_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn
err = check_bpf_snprintf_call(env, regs);
break;
case BPF_FUNC_loop:
+ update_loop_inline_state(env, meta.subprogno);
err = __check_func_call(env, insn, insn_idx_p, meta.subprogno,
set_loop_callback_state);
break;
@@ -7661,11 +7687,6 @@ static bool check_reg_sane_offset(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
return true;
}
-static struct bpf_insn_aux_data *cur_aux(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
-{
- return &env->insn_aux_data[env->insn_idx];
-}
-
enum {
REASON_BOUNDS = -1,
REASON_TYPE = -2,
@@ -14294,6 +14315,140 @@ static int do_misc_fixups(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
return 0;
}
+struct bpf_prog *inline_bpf_loop(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
+ int position,
+ s32 stack_base,
+ u32 callback_subprogno,
+ u32 *cnt)
+{
+ s32 r6_offset = stack_base + 0 * BPF_REG_SIZE;
+ s32 r7_offset = stack_base + 1 * BPF_REG_SIZE;
+ s32 r8_offset = stack_base + 2 * BPF_REG_SIZE;
+ int reg_loop_max = BPF_REG_6;
+ int reg_loop_cnt = BPF_REG_7;
+ int reg_loop_ctx = BPF_REG_8;
+
+ struct bpf_prog *new_prog;
+ u32 callback_start;
+ u32 call_insn_offset;
+ s32 callback_offset;
+
+ /* This represents an inlined version of bpf_iter.c:bpf_loop,
+ * be careful to modify this code in sync.
+ */
+ struct bpf_insn insn_buf[] = {
+ /* Return error and jump to the end of the patch if
+ * expected number of iterations is too big.
+ */
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JLE, BPF_REG_1, BPF_MAX_LOOPS, 2),
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, -E2BIG),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 16),
+ /* spill R6, R7, R8 to use these as loop vars */
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_6, r6_offset),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_7, r7_offset),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, BPF_REG_8, r8_offset),
+ /* initialize loop vars */
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(reg_loop_max, BPF_REG_1),
+ BPF_MOV32_IMM(reg_loop_cnt, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(reg_loop_ctx, BPF_REG_3),
+ /* loop header,
+ * if reg_loop_cnt >= reg_loop_max skip the loop body
+ */
+ BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGE, reg_loop_cnt, reg_loop_max, 5),
+ /* callback call,
+ * correct callback offset would be set after patching
+ */
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, reg_loop_cnt),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, reg_loop_ctx),
+ BPF_CALL_REL(0),
+ /* increment loop counter */
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, reg_loop_cnt, 1),
+ /* jump to loop header if callback returned 0 */
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, -6),
+ /* return value of bpf_loop,
+ * set R0 to the number of iterations
+ */
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, reg_loop_cnt),
+ /* restore original values of R6, R7, R8 */
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10, r6_offset),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_10, r7_offset),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_10, r8_offset),
+ };
+
+ *cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(insn_buf);
+ new_prog = bpf_patch_insn_data(env, position, insn_buf, *cnt);
+ if (!new_prog)
+ return new_prog;
+
+ /* callback start is known only after patching */
+ callback_start = env->subprog_info[callback_subprogno].start;
+ /* Note: insn_buf[12] is an offset of BPF_CALL_REL instruction */
+ call_insn_offset = position + 12;
+ callback_offset = callback_start - call_insn_offset - 1;
+ env->prog->insnsi[call_insn_offset].imm = callback_offset;
+
+ return new_prog;
+}
+
+static bool is_bpf_loop_call(struct bpf_insn *insn)
+{
+ return insn->code == (BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL) &&
+ insn->src_reg == 0 &&
+ insn->imm == BPF_FUNC_loop;
+}
+
+/* For all sub-programs in the program (including main) check
+ * insn_aux_data to see if there are bpf_loop calls that require
+ * inlining. If such calls are found the calls are replaced with a
+ * sequence of instructions produced by `inline_bpf_loop` function and
+ * subprog stack_depth is increased by the size of 3 registers.
+ * This stack space is used to spill values of the R6, R7, R8. These
+ * registers are used to store the loop bound, counter and context
+ * variables.
+ */
+static int optimize_bpf_loop(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
+{
+ struct bpf_subprog_info *subprogs = env->subprog_info;
+ int i, cur_subprog = 0, cnt, delta = 0;
+ struct bpf_insn *insn = env->prog->insnsi;
+ int insn_cnt = env->prog->len;
+ u16 stack_depth = subprogs[cur_subprog].stack_depth;
+ u16 stack_depth_extra = 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < insn_cnt; i++, insn++) {
+ struct bpf_loop_inline_state *inline_state =
+ &env->insn_aux_data[i + delta].loop_inline_state;
+
+ if (is_bpf_loop_call(insn) && inline_state->fit_for_inline) {
+ struct bpf_prog *new_prog;
+
+ stack_depth_extra = BPF_REG_SIZE * 3;
+ new_prog = inline_bpf_loop(env,
+ i + delta,
+ -(stack_depth + stack_depth_extra),
+ inline_state->callback_subprogno,
+ &cnt);
+ if (!new_prog)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ delta += cnt - 1;
+ env->prog = new_prog;
+ insn = new_prog->insnsi + i + delta;
+ }
+
+ if (subprogs[cur_subprog + 1].start == i + delta + 1) {
+ subprogs[cur_subprog].stack_depth += stack_depth_extra;
+ cur_subprog++;
+ stack_depth = subprogs[cur_subprog].stack_depth;
+ stack_depth_extra = 0;
+ }
+ }
+
+ env->prog->aux->stack_depth = env->subprog_info[0].stack_depth;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static void free_states(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
{
struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl, *sln;
@@ -15030,6 +15185,9 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr, bpfptr_t uattr)
if (ret == 0)
ret = check_max_stack_depth(env);
+ if (ret == 0)
+ optimize_bpf_loop(env);
+
/* instruction rewrites happen after this point */
if (is_priv) {
if (ret == 0)
--
2.25.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-08 19:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-08 19:26 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/5] bpf_loop inlining Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-08 19:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/5] selftests/bpf: specify expected instructions in test_verifier tests Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 17:56 ` Song Liu
2022-06-08 19:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/5] selftests/bpf: allow BTF specs and func infos " Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 18:09 ` Song Liu
2022-06-10 19:16 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 20:56 ` Song Liu
2022-06-08 19:26 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2022-06-09 14:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/5] bpf: Inline calls to bpf_loop when callback is known kernel test robot
2022-06-10 20:54 ` Song Liu
2022-06-10 21:54 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 22:40 ` Song Liu
2022-06-10 22:49 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 23:01 ` Song Liu
2022-06-10 23:21 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-11 1:46 ` Song Liu
2022-06-08 19:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 4/5] selftests/bpf: BPF test_verifier selftests for bpf_loop inlining Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 18:14 ` Song Liu
2022-06-10 19:20 ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 20:57 ` Song Liu
2022-06-08 19:26 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 5/5] selftests/bpf: BPF test_prog " Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-10 18:15 ` 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=20220608192630.3710333-4-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=joannelkoong@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=song@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 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.