All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
	kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, void@manifault.com,
	sinquersw@gmail.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/15] libbpf: tie struct_ops programs to kernel BTF ids, not to local ids
Date: Sat,  2 Mar 2024 03:19:07 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240302011920.15302-3-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240302011920.15302-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>

Enforce the following existing limitation on struct_ops programs based
on kernel BTF id instead of program-local BTF id:

    struct_ops BPF prog can be re-used between multiple .struct_ops &
    .struct_ops.link as long as it's the same struct_ops struct
    definition and the same function pointer field

This allows reusing same BPF program for versioned struct_ops map
definitions, e.g.:

    SEC("struct_ops/test")
    int BPF_PROG(foo) { ... }

    struct some_ops___v1 { int (*test)(void); };
    struct some_ops___v2 { int (*test)(void); };

    SEC(".struct_ops.link") struct some_ops___v1 a = { .test = foo }
    SEC(".struct_ops.link") struct some_ops___v2 b = { .test = foo }

Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 49 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index e2a4c409980b..2c0cb72bc7a4 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -1146,8 +1146,32 @@ static int bpf_map__init_kern_struct_ops(struct bpf_map *map)
 
 			if (mod_btf)
 				prog->attach_btf_obj_fd = mod_btf->fd;
-			prog->attach_btf_id = kern_type_id;
-			prog->expected_attach_type = kern_member_idx;
+
+			/* if we haven't yet processed this BPF program, record proper
+			 * attach_btf_id and member_idx
+			 */
+			if (!prog->attach_btf_id) {
+				prog->attach_btf_id = kern_type_id;
+				prog->expected_attach_type = kern_member_idx;
+			}
+
+			/* struct_ops BPF prog can be re-used between multiple
+			 * .struct_ops & .struct_ops.link as long as it's the
+			 * same struct_ops struct definition and the same
+			 * function pointer field
+			 */
+			if (prog->attach_btf_id != kern_type_id) {
+				pr_warn("struct_ops init_kern %s func ptr %s: invalid reuse of prog %s in sec %s with type %u: attach_btf_id %u != kern_type_id %u\n",
+					map->name, mname, prog->name, prog->sec_name, prog->type,
+					prog->attach_btf_id, kern_type_id);
+				return -EINVAL;
+			}
+			if (prog->expected_attach_type != kern_member_idx) {
+				pr_warn("struct_ops init_kern %s func ptr %s: invalid reuse of prog %s in sec %s with type %u: expected_attach_type %u != kern_member_idx %u\n",
+					map->name, mname, prog->name, prog->sec_name, prog->type,
+					prog->expected_attach_type, kern_member_idx);
+				return -EINVAL;
+			}
 
 			st_ops->kern_func_off[i] = kern_data_off + kern_moff;
 
@@ -9428,27 +9452,6 @@ static int bpf_object__collect_st_ops_relos(struct bpf_object *obj,
 			return -EINVAL;
 		}
 
-		/* if we haven't yet processed this BPF program, record proper
-		 * attach_btf_id and member_idx
-		 */
-		if (!prog->attach_btf_id) {
-			prog->attach_btf_id = st_ops->type_id;
-			prog->expected_attach_type = member_idx;
-		}
-
-		/* struct_ops BPF prog can be re-used between multiple
-		 * .struct_ops & .struct_ops.link as long as it's the
-		 * same struct_ops struct definition and the same
-		 * function pointer field
-		 */
-		if (prog->attach_btf_id != st_ops->type_id ||
-		    prog->expected_attach_type != member_idx) {
-			pr_warn("struct_ops reloc %s: cannot use prog %s in sec %s with type %u attach_btf_id %u expected_attach_type %u for func ptr %s\n",
-				map->name, prog->name, prog->sec_name, prog->type,
-				prog->attach_btf_id, prog->expected_attach_type, name);
-			return -EINVAL;
-		}
-
 		st_ops->progs[member_idx] = prog;
 
 		/* st_ops->data will be exposed to users, being returned by
-- 
2.43.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-02  1:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-02  1:19 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/15] libbpf: type suffixes and autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/15] libbpf: allow version suffixes (___smth) for struct_ops types Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/15] libbpf: honor autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/15] selftests/bpf: test struct_ops map definition with type suffix Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/15] selftests/bpf: utility functions to capture libbpf log in test_progs Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/15] selftests/bpf: bad_struct_ops test Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/15] selftests/bpf: test autocreate behavior for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/15] libbpf: sync progs autoload with maps autocreate " Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-04 19:13   ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/15] selftests/bpf: verify struct_ops autoload/autocreate sync Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/15] libbpf: replace elf_state->st_ops_* fields with SEC_ST_OPS sec_type Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 11/15] libbpf: struct_ops in SEC("?.struct_ops") and SEC("?.struct_ops.link") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 12/15] libbpf: rewrite btf datasec names starting from '?' Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 13/15] selftests/bpf: test case for SEC("?.struct_ops") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 14/15] bpf: allow '?' at the beginning of DATASEC names Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-02  1:19 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/15] selftests/bpf: test cases for '?' in BTF names Eduard Zingerman

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=20240302011920.15302-3-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=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
    --cc=void@manifault.com \
    --cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    /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.