From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: 'Alexei Starovoitov ' <ast@kernel.org>,
'Andrii Nakryiko ' <andrii@kernel.org>,
'Daniel Borkmann ' <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
'Amery Hung ' <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH bpf-next 09/12] bpf: Add bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 15:46:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250418224652.105998-10-martin.lau@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250418224652.105998-1-martin.lau@linux.dev>
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
In the kernel fq qdisc implementation, it only needs to look at
the fields of the first node in a list but does not always
need to remove it from the list. It is more convenient to have
a peek kfunc for the list. It works similar to the bpf_rbtree_first().
This patch adds bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc. The verifier is changed
such that the kfunc returning "struct bpf_list_node *" will be
marked as non-owning. The exception is the KF_ACQUIRE kfunc. The
net effect is only the new bpf_list_{front,back} kfuncs will
have its return pointer marked as non-owning.
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 12 ++++++++++--
2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 36150d340c16..78cefb41266a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2293,6 +2293,26 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
return __bpf_list_del(head, true);
}
+__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_front(struct bpf_list_head *head)
+{
+ struct list_head *h = (struct list_head *)head;
+
+ if (list_empty(h) || unlikely(!h->next))
+ return NULL;
+
+ return (struct bpf_list_node *)h->next;
+}
+
+__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
+{
+ struct list_head *h = (struct list_head *)head;
+
+ if (list_empty(h) || unlikely(!h->next))
+ return NULL;
+
+ return (struct bpf_list_node *)h->prev;
+}
+
__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_rb_node *bpf_rbtree_remove(struct bpf_rb_root *root,
struct bpf_rb_node *node)
{
@@ -3236,6 +3256,8 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_front, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_back, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_front, KF_RET_NULL)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_back, KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_task_acquire, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RCU | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_task_release, KF_RELEASE)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_rbtree_remove, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index aacde0274e0f..78a9b3d1cd29 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -12079,6 +12079,8 @@ enum special_kfunc_type {
KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl,
KF_bpf_list_pop_front,
KF_bpf_list_pop_back,
+ KF_bpf_list_front,
+ KF_bpf_list_back,
KF_bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx,
KF_bpf_rdonly_cast,
KF_bpf_rcu_read_lock,
@@ -12124,6 +12126,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_front)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rdonly_cast)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rbtree_remove)
@@ -12160,6 +12164,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_front)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rdonly_cast)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rcu_read_lock)
@@ -12598,7 +12604,9 @@ static bool is_bpf_list_api_kfunc(u32 btf_id)
return btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front_impl] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_front] ||
- btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_back];
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_back] ||
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_front] ||
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_back];
}
static bool is_bpf_rbtree_api_kfunc(u32 btf_id)
@@ -13902,7 +13910,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
if (is_kfunc_ret_null(&meta))
regs[BPF_REG_0].id = id;
regs[BPF_REG_0].ref_obj_id = id;
- } else if (is_rbtree_node_type(ptr_type)) {
+ } else if (is_rbtree_node_type(ptr_type) || is_list_node_type(ptr_type)) {
ref_set_non_owning(env, ®s[BPF_REG_0]);
}
--
2.47.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-18 22:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-18 22:46 [RFC PATCH bpf-next 00/12] bpf: A fq example similar to the kernel sch_fq.c implementation Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 01/12] bpf: Check KF_bpf_rbtree_add_impl for the "case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_RB_NODE" Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:05 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 02/12] bpf: Simplify reg0 marking for the rbtree kfuncs that return a bpf_rb_node pointer Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 03/12] bpf: Add bpf_rbtree_{root,left,right} kfunc Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:43 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 04/12] selftests/bpf: Adjust failure message in the rbtree_fail test Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:44 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 05/12] bpf: Allow refcounted bpf_rb_node used in bpf_rbtree_{remove,left,right} Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 2:32 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 06/12] selftests/bpf: Adjust test that does not allow refcounted node in rbtree_remove Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 2:36 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-22 2:48 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 07/12] selftests/bpf: Add rbtree_search test Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:03 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 08/12] bpf: Simplify reg0 marking for the list kfuncs that return a bpf_list_node pointer Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:05 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2025-04-22 3:07 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 09/12] bpf: Add bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 10/12] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_list_{front,back} Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-25 23:28 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 11/12] bpf: net: Add a qdisc kfunc to set sk_pacing_status Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 12/12] selftests/bpf: A bpf fq implementation similar to the kernel sch_fq Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-25 0:13 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-04-25 23:50 ` Martin KaFai Lau
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=20250418224652.105998-10-martin.lau@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.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.