[PATCH v6 0/2] libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register error

[PATCH v6 0/2] libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register error

[Jiawei Zhao]

When using GCC on x86-64 to compile an usdt prog with -O1 or higher
optimization, the compiler will generate SIB addressing mode for global
array and PC-relative addressing mode for global variable,
e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" and "-1@4+t1(%rip)".

The current USDT implementation in libbpf cannot parse these two formats,
causing `bpf_program__attach_usdt()` to fail with -ENOENT
(unrecognized register).

This patch series adds support for SIB addressing mode in USDT probes.
The main changes include:
- add correct handling logic for SIB-addressed arguments in
  `parse_usdt_arg`.
- force -O2 optimization for usdt.test.o to generate SIB addressing usdt
  argument spec.
- change the global variable t1 to a local variable, to avoid compiler
  generating PC-relative addressing mode for it.

Testing shows that the SIB probe correctly generates 8@(%rcx,%rax,8) 
argument spec and passes all validation checks.

The modification history of this patch series:
Change since v1:
- refactor the code to make it more readable
- modify the commit message to explain why and how

Change since v2:
- fix the `scale` uninitialized error

Change since v3:
- force -O2 optimization for usdt.test.o to generate SIB addressing usdt
  and pass all test cases.

Change since v4:
- split the patch into two parts, one for the fix and the other for the
  test

Change since v5:
- Only enable optimization for x86 architecture to generate SIB addressing
  usdt argument spec.

Do we need to add support for PC-relative USDT argument spec handling in
libbpf? I have some interest in this question, but currently have no 
ideas. Getting offsets based on symbols requires dependency on the symbol
table. However, once the binary file is stripped, the symtab will also be
removed, which will cause this approach to fail. Does anyone have any
thoughts on this?

Jiawei Zhao (2):
  libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register
    error
  selftests/bpf: Force -O2 for USDT selftests to cover SIB handling
    logic

 tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h                      | 33 +++++++++++++-
 tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c                          | 43 ++++++++++++++++---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  8 ++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c | 18 +++++---
 4 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

-- 
2.43.0

[PATCH v6 1/2] libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register error

[Jiawei Zhao]

On x86-64, USDT arguments can be specified using Scale-Index-Base (SIB)
addressing, e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)". The current USDT implementation
in libbpf cannot parse this format, causing `bpf_program__attach_usdt()`
to fail with -ENOENT (unrecognized register).

This patch fixes this by implementing the necessary changes:
- add correct handling for SIB-addressed arguments in `bpf_usdt_arg`.
- add adaptive support to `__bpf_usdt_arg_type` and
  `__bpf_usdt_arg_spec` to represent SIB addressing parameters.

Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
---
 tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
 tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c     | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
index 2a7865c8e3fe..246513088c3a 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
@@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type {
 	BPF_USDT_ARG_CONST,
 	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG,
 	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
+	BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB,
 };
 
 struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
@@ -43,6 +44,10 @@ struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
 	enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type arg_type;
 	/* offset of referenced register within struct pt_regs */
 	short reg_off;
+	/* offset of index register in pt_regs, only used in SIB mode */
+	short idx_reg_off;
+	/* scale factor for index register, only used in SIB mode */
+	short scale;
 	/* whether arg should be interpreted as signed value */
 	bool arg_signed;
 	/* number of bits that need to be cleared and, optionally,
@@ -149,7 +154,7 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
 {
 	struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
 	struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec *arg_spec;
-	unsigned long val;
+	unsigned long val, idx;
 	int err, spec_id;
 
 	*res = 0;
@@ -202,6 +207,32 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
 			return err;
 #if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
 		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
+#endif
+		break;
+	case BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB:
+		/* Arg is in memory addressed by SIB (Scale-Index-Base) mode
+		 * (e.g., "-1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" in USDT arg spec). Register
+		 * is identified like with BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB case, the offset
+		 * is in arg_spec->val_off, the scale factor is in arg_spec->scale.
+		 * Firstly, we fetch the base register contents and the index
+		 * register contents from pt_regs. Secondly, we multiply the
+		 * index register contents by the scale factor, then add the
+		 * base address and the offset to get the final address. Finally,
+		 * we do another user-space probe read to fetch argument value
+		 * itself.
+		 */
+		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&val, sizeof(val), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->reg_off);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&idx, sizeof(idx), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->idx_reg_off);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+		err = bpf_probe_read_user(&val, sizeof(val),
+				(void *)val + idx * arg_spec->scale + arg_spec->val_off);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
+		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
 #endif
 		break;
 	default:
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
index 4e4a52742b01..1f8b9e1c9819 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
@@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ enum usdt_arg_type {
 	USDT_ARG_CONST,
 	USDT_ARG_REG,
 	USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
+	USDT_ARG_SIB,
 };
 
 /* should match exactly struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec from usdt.bpf.h */
@@ -207,6 +208,8 @@ struct usdt_arg_spec {
 	__u64 val_off;
 	enum usdt_arg_type arg_type;
 	short reg_off;
+	short idx_reg_off;
+	short scale;
 	bool arg_signed;
 	char arg_bitshift;
 };
@@ -1283,11 +1286,39 @@ static int calc_pt_regs_off(const char *reg_name)
 
 static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec *arg, int *arg_sz)
 {
-	char reg_name[16];
-	int len, reg_off;
-	long off;
+	char reg_name[16] = {0}, idx_reg_name[16] = {0};
+	int len, reg_off, idx_reg_off, scale = 1;
+	long off = 0;
+
+	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
+				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 5 ||
+		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
+				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 4 ||
+		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
+				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 4 ||
+		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
+				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 3
+		) {
+		/* Scale Index Base case, e.g., 1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)
+		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax,8)
+		 * 1@-96(%rbp,%rax)
+		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax)
+		 */
+		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_SIB;
+		arg->val_off = off;
+		arg->scale = scale;
+
+		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
+		if (reg_off < 0)
+			return reg_off;
+		arg->reg_off = reg_off;
 
-	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
+		idx_reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(idx_reg_name);
+		if (idx_reg_off < 0)
+			return idx_reg_off;
+		arg->idx_reg_off = idx_reg_off;
+	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n",
+				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
 		/* Memory dereference case, e.g., -4@-20(%rbp) */
 		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
 		arg->val_off = off;
@@ -1298,7 +1329,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
 	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
 		/* Memory dereference case without offset, e.g., 8@(%rsp) */
 		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
-		arg->val_off = 0;
+		arg->val_off = off;
 		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
 		if (reg_off < 0)
 			return reg_off;
@@ -1306,7 +1337,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
 	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %%%15s %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
 		/* Register read case, e.g., -4@%eax */
 		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG;
-		arg->val_off = 0;
+		arg->val_off = off;
 
 		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
 		if (reg_off < 0)
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register error

[Jiri Olsa]

On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 08:48:02AM +0000, Jiawei Zhao wrote:
> On x86-64, USDT arguments can be specified using Scale-Index-Base (SIB)
> addressing, e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)". The current USDT implementation
> in libbpf cannot parse this format, causing `bpf_program__attach_usdt()`
> to fail with -ENOENT (unrecognized register).
> 
> This patch fixes this by implementing the necessary changes:
> - add correct handling for SIB-addressed arguments in `bpf_usdt_arg`.
> - add adaptive support to `__bpf_usdt_arg_type` and
>   `__bpf_usdt_arg_spec` to represent SIB addressing parameters.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c     | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>  2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
> index 2a7865c8e3fe..246513088c3a 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type {
>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_CONST,
>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG,
>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
> +	BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB,
>  };
>  
>  struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
> @@ -43,6 +44,10 @@ struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
>  	enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type arg_type;
>  	/* offset of referenced register within struct pt_regs */
>  	short reg_off;
> +	/* offset of index register in pt_regs, only used in SIB mode */
> +	short idx_reg_off;
> +	/* scale factor for index register, only used in SIB mode */
> +	short scale;
>  	/* whether arg should be interpreted as signed value */
>  	bool arg_signed;
>  	/* number of bits that need to be cleared and, optionally,
> @@ -149,7 +154,7 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
>  {
>  	struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
>  	struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec *arg_spec;
> -	unsigned long val;
> +	unsigned long val, idx;
>  	int err, spec_id;
>  
>  	*res = 0;
> @@ -202,6 +207,32 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
>  			return err;
>  #if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
>  		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
> +#endif
> +		break;
> +	case BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB:
> +		/* Arg is in memory addressed by SIB (Scale-Index-Base) mode
> +		 * (e.g., "-1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" in USDT arg spec). Register
> +		 * is identified like with BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB case, the offset
> +		 * is in arg_spec->val_off, the scale factor is in arg_spec->scale.
> +		 * Firstly, we fetch the base register contents and the index
> +		 * register contents from pt_regs. Secondly, we multiply the
> +		 * index register contents by the scale factor, then add the
> +		 * base address and the offset to get the final address. Finally,
> +		 * we do another user-space probe read to fetch argument value
> +		 * itself.
> +		 */
> +		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&val, sizeof(val), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->reg_off);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&idx, sizeof(idx), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->idx_reg_off);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +		err = bpf_probe_read_user(&val, sizeof(val),
> +				(void *)val + idx * arg_spec->scale + arg_spec->val_off);
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
> +		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
>  #endif
>  		break;
>  	default:
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
> index 4e4a52742b01..1f8b9e1c9819 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
> @@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ enum usdt_arg_type {
>  	USDT_ARG_CONST,
>  	USDT_ARG_REG,
>  	USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
> +	USDT_ARG_SIB,
>  };
>  
>  /* should match exactly struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec from usdt.bpf.h */
> @@ -207,6 +208,8 @@ struct usdt_arg_spec {
>  	__u64 val_off;
>  	enum usdt_arg_type arg_type;
>  	short reg_off;
> +	short idx_reg_off;
> +	short scale;
>  	bool arg_signed;
>  	char arg_bitshift;
>  };
> @@ -1283,11 +1286,39 @@ static int calc_pt_regs_off(const char *reg_name)
>  
>  static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec *arg, int *arg_sz)
>  {
> -	char reg_name[16];
> -	int len, reg_off;
> -	long off;
> +	char reg_name[16] = {0}, idx_reg_name[16] = {0};
> +	int len, reg_off, idx_reg_off, scale = 1;
> +	long off = 0;
> +
> +	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 5 ||
> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
> +				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 4 ||
> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 4 ||
> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
> +				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 3
> +		) {
> +		/* Scale Index Base case, e.g., 1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)
> +		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax,8)
> +		 * 1@-96(%rbp,%rax)
> +		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax)
> +		 */

hi,
I'm getting following error from the test:

subtest_multispec_usdt:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
libbpf: usdt: unrecognized arg #10 spec '-2@nums(%rax,%rax) -1@$-127'
libbpf: prog 'usdt12': failed to auto-attach: -EINVAL
subtest_multispec_usdt:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -22 (errno 22)
#480/2   usdt/multispec:FAIL

arguments look like:
    Arguments: -4@$3 -4@$4 -8@$42 -8@$45 -4@$5 -8@$6 8@%rdx 8@%rsi -4@$-9 -2@%cx -2@nums(%rax,%rax) -1@$-127

not sure why there's variable name in the arg10 definition

gcc (GCC) 15.1.1 20250521 (Red Hat 15.1.1-2)
clang version 20.1.8 (Fedora 20.1.8-3.fc42)

thanks,
jirka


> +		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_SIB;
> +		arg->val_off = off;
> +		arg->scale = scale;
> +
> +		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
> +		if (reg_off < 0)
> +			return reg_off;
> +		arg->reg_off = reg_off;
>  
> -	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
> +		idx_reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(idx_reg_name);
> +		if (idx_reg_off < 0)
> +			return idx_reg_off;
> +		arg->idx_reg_off = idx_reg_off;
> +	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n",
> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
>  		/* Memory dereference case, e.g., -4@-20(%rbp) */
>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
>  		arg->val_off = off;
> @@ -1298,7 +1329,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
>  	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
>  		/* Memory dereference case without offset, e.g., 8@(%rsp) */
>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
> -		arg->val_off = 0;
> +		arg->val_off = off;
>  		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
>  		if (reg_off < 0)
>  			return reg_off;
> @@ -1306,7 +1337,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
>  	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %%%15s %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
>  		/* Register read case, e.g., -4@%eax */
>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG;
> -		arg->val_off = 0;
> +		arg->val_off = off;
>  
>  		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
>  		if (reg_off < 0)
> -- 
> 2.43.0
> 
> 

Re:Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] libbpf: fix USDT SIB argument handling causing unrecognized register error

[赵佳炜]

Hi Jiri,

Unfortunately, I couldn't reproduce this issue on my machine.
However, the good news is that it's similar to the PC-relative USDT argument spec, and I was able to construct a minimal example that reproduces the issue reliably.

In both cases, we need to resolve the address or offset for the given symbol.
I'm currently exploring whether the address or offset can be resolved from the DWARF information.
If this approach works, I’ll append my modifications to this patch.


At 2025-08-04 18:23:59, "Jiri Olsa" <olsajiri@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sat, Aug 02, 2025 at 08:48:02AM +0000, Jiawei Zhao wrote:
>> On x86-64, USDT arguments can be specified using Scale-Index-Base (SIB)
>> addressing, e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)". The current USDT implementation
>> in libbpf cannot parse this format, causing `bpf_program__attach_usdt()`
>> to fail with -ENOENT (unrecognized register).
>> 
>> This patch fixes this by implementing the necessary changes:
>> - add correct handling for SIB-addressed arguments in `bpf_usdt_arg`.
>> - add adaptive support to `__bpf_usdt_arg_type` and
>>   `__bpf_usdt_arg_spec` to represent SIB addressing parameters.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
>> ---
>>  tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>  tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c     | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
>>  2 files changed, 69 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
>> index 2a7865c8e3fe..246513088c3a 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.bpf.h
>> @@ -34,6 +34,7 @@ enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type {
>>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_CONST,
>>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG,
>>  	BPF_USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
>> +	BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB,
>>  };
>>  
>>  struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
>> @@ -43,6 +44,10 @@ struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec {
>>  	enum __bpf_usdt_arg_type arg_type;
>>  	/* offset of referenced register within struct pt_regs */
>>  	short reg_off;
>> +	/* offset of index register in pt_regs, only used in SIB mode */
>> +	short idx_reg_off;
>> +	/* scale factor for index register, only used in SIB mode */
>> +	short scale;
>>  	/* whether arg should be interpreted as signed value */
>>  	bool arg_signed;
>>  	/* number of bits that need to be cleared and, optionally,
>> @@ -149,7 +154,7 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
>>  {
>>  	struct __bpf_usdt_spec *spec;
>>  	struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec *arg_spec;
>> -	unsigned long val;
>> +	unsigned long val, idx;
>>  	int err, spec_id;
>>  
>>  	*res = 0;
>> @@ -202,6 +207,32 @@ int bpf_usdt_arg(struct pt_regs *ctx, __u64 arg_num, long *res)
>>  			return err;
>>  #if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
>>  		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
>> +#endif
>> +		break;
>> +	case BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB:
>> +		/* Arg is in memory addressed by SIB (Scale-Index-Base) mode
>> +		 * (e.g., "-1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" in USDT arg spec). Register
>> +		 * is identified like with BPF_USDT_ARG_SIB case, the offset
>> +		 * is in arg_spec->val_off, the scale factor is in arg_spec->scale.
>> +		 * Firstly, we fetch the base register contents and the index
>> +		 * register contents from pt_regs. Secondly, we multiply the
>> +		 * index register contents by the scale factor, then add the
>> +		 * base address and the offset to get the final address. Finally,
>> +		 * we do another user-space probe read to fetch argument value
>> +		 * itself.
>> +		 */
>> +		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&val, sizeof(val), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->reg_off);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>> +		err = bpf_probe_read_kernel(&idx, sizeof(idx), (void *)ctx + arg_spec->idx_reg_off);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>> +		err = bpf_probe_read_user(&val, sizeof(val),
>> +				(void *)val + idx * arg_spec->scale + arg_spec->val_off);
>> +		if (err)
>> +			return err;
>> +#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
>> +		val >>= arg_spec->arg_bitshift;
>>  #endif
>>  		break;
>>  	default:
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
>> index 4e4a52742b01..1f8b9e1c9819 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/usdt.c
>> @@ -200,6 +200,7 @@ enum usdt_arg_type {
>>  	USDT_ARG_CONST,
>>  	USDT_ARG_REG,
>>  	USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF,
>> +	USDT_ARG_SIB,
>>  };
>>  
>>  /* should match exactly struct __bpf_usdt_arg_spec from usdt.bpf.h */
>> @@ -207,6 +208,8 @@ struct usdt_arg_spec {
>>  	__u64 val_off;
>>  	enum usdt_arg_type arg_type;
>>  	short reg_off;
>> +	short idx_reg_off;
>> +	short scale;
>>  	bool arg_signed;
>>  	char arg_bitshift;
>>  };
>> @@ -1283,11 +1286,39 @@ static int calc_pt_regs_off(const char *reg_name)
>>  
>>  static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec *arg, int *arg_sz)
>>  {
>> -	char reg_name[16];
>> -	int len, reg_off;
>> -	long off;
>> +	char reg_name[16] = {0}, idx_reg_name[16] = {0};
>> +	int len, reg_off, idx_reg_off, scale = 1;
>> +	long off = 0;
>> +
>> +	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
>> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 5 ||
>> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^,] , %d ) %n",
>> +				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &scale, &len) == 4 ||
>> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
>> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 4 ||
>> +		sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^,] , %%%15[^)] ) %n",
>> +				arg_sz, reg_name, idx_reg_name, &len) == 3
>> +		) {
>> +		/* Scale Index Base case, e.g., 1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)
>> +		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax,8)
>> +		 * 1@-96(%rbp,%rax)
>> +		 * 1@(%rbp,%rax)
>> +		 */
>
>hi,
>I'm getting following error from the test:
>
>subtest_multispec_usdt:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec
>libbpf: usdt: unrecognized arg #10 spec '-2@nums(%rax,%rax) -1@$-127'
>libbpf: prog 'usdt12': failed to auto-attach: -EINVAL
>subtest_multispec_usdt:FAIL:skel_attach unexpected error: -22 (errno 22)
>#480/2   usdt/multispec:FAIL
>
>arguments look like:
>    Arguments: -4@$3 -4@$4 -8@$42 -8@$45 -4@$5 -8@$6 8@%rdx 8@%rsi -4@$-9 -2@%cx -2@nums(%rax,%rax) -1@$-127
>
>not sure why there's variable name in the arg10 definition
>
>gcc (GCC) 15.1.1 20250521 (Red Hat 15.1.1-2)
>clang version 20.1.8 (Fedora 20.1.8-3.fc42)
>
>thanks,
>jirka
>
>
>> +		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_SIB;
>> +		arg->val_off = off;
>> +		arg->scale = scale;
>> +
>> +		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
>> +		if (reg_off < 0)
>> +			return reg_off;
>> +		arg->reg_off = reg_off;
>>  
>> -	if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
>> +		idx_reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(idx_reg_name);
>> +		if (idx_reg_off < 0)
>> +			return idx_reg_off;
>> +		arg->idx_reg_off = idx_reg_off;
>> +	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %ld ( %%%15[^)] ) %n",
>> +				arg_sz, &off, reg_name, &len) == 3) {
>>  		/* Memory dereference case, e.g., -4@-20(%rbp) */
>>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
>>  		arg->val_off = off;
>> @@ -1298,7 +1329,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
>>  	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ ( %%%15[^)] ) %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
>>  		/* Memory dereference case without offset, e.g., 8@(%rsp) */
>>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG_DEREF;
>> -		arg->val_off = 0;
>> +		arg->val_off = off;
>>  		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
>>  		if (reg_off < 0)
>>  			return reg_off;
>> @@ -1306,7 +1337,7 @@ static int parse_usdt_arg(const char *arg_str, int arg_num, struct usdt_arg_spec
>>  	} else if (sscanf(arg_str, " %d @ %%%15s %n", arg_sz, reg_name, &len) == 2) {
>>  		/* Register read case, e.g., -4@%eax */
>>  		arg->arg_type = USDT_ARG_REG;
>> -		arg->val_off = 0;
>> +		arg->val_off = off;
>>  
>>  		reg_off = calc_pt_regs_off(reg_name);
>>  		if (reg_off < 0)
>> -- 
>> 2.43.0
>> 
>> 

[PATCH v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Force -O2 for USDT selftests to cover SIB handling logic

[Jiawei Zhao]

When using GCC on x86-64 to compile an usdt prog with -O1 or higher
optimization, the compiler will generate SIB addressing mode for global
array and PC-relative addressing mode for global variable,
e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" and "-1@4+t1(%rip)".

In this patch:
- force -O2 optimization for usdt.test.o to generate SIB addressing usdt
  argument spec.
- change the global variable t1 to a local variable, to avoid compiler
  generating PC-relative addressing mode for it.

Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  8 ++++++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
 2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
index 910d8d6402ef..4b77d06d5c42 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
@@ -759,6 +759,14 @@ TRUNNER_BPF_BUILD_RULE := $$(error no BPF objects should be built)
 TRUNNER_BPF_CFLAGS :=
 $(eval $(call DEFINE_TEST_RUNNER,test_maps))
 
+# Force usdt.c to use -O2 optimization to generate SIB addressing
+# Only apply on x86 architecture where SIB addressing is relevant
+ifeq ($(ARCH), x86)
+$(OUTPUT)/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
+$(OUTPUT)/cpuv4/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
+$(OUTPUT)/no_alu32/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
+endif
+
 # Define test_verifier test runner.
 # It is much simpler than test_maps/test_progs and sufficiently different from
 # them (e.g., test.h is using completely pattern), that it's worth just
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
index 495d66414b57..86f354d25aef 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
@@ -14,10 +14,15 @@ static volatile int idx = 2;
 static volatile __u64 bla = 0xFEDCBA9876543210ULL;
 static volatile short nums[] = {-1, -2, -3, -4};
 
-static volatile struct {
-	int x;
-	signed char y;
-} t1 = { 1, -127 };
+/*
+ * TODO:  At O2 optimization level, t1's USDT argument spec becomes -1@4+t1(%rip).
+ * Since libbpf doesn't support RIP addressing mode yet, this causes "unrecognized register" errors.
+ * This test will be re-enabled once libbpf supports RIP addressing mode.
+ */
+// static volatile struct {
+//	int x;
+//	signed char y;
+// } t1 = { 1, -127 };
 
 #define SEC(name) __attribute__((section(name), used))
 
@@ -27,6 +32,7 @@ unsigned short test_usdt12_semaphore SEC(".probes");
 
 static void __always_inline trigger_func(int x) {
 	long y = 42;
+	signed char t1 = -127;
 
 	if (test_usdt0_semaphore)
 		STAP_PROBE(test, usdt0);
@@ -36,7 +42,7 @@ static void __always_inline trigger_func(int x) {
 		STAP_PROBE12(test, usdt12,
 			     x, x + 1, y, x + y, 5,
 			     y / 7, bla, &bla, -9, nums[x],
-			     nums[idx], t1.y);
+			     nums[idx], t1);
 	}
 }
 
@@ -106,7 +112,7 @@ static void subtest_basic_usdt(void)
 	ASSERT_EQ(bss->usdt12_args[8], -9, "usdt12_arg9");
 	ASSERT_EQ(bss->usdt12_args[9], nums[1], "usdt12_arg10");
 	ASSERT_EQ(bss->usdt12_args[10], nums[idx], "usdt12_arg11");
-	ASSERT_EQ(bss->usdt12_args[11], t1.y, "usdt12_arg12");
+	ASSERT_EQ(bss->usdt12_args[11], -127, "usdt12_arg12");
 
 	int usdt12_expected_arg_sizes[12] = { 4, 4, 8, 8, 4, 8, 8, 8, 4, 2, 2, 1 };
 
-- 
2.43.0

Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Force -O2 for USDT selftests to cover SIB handling logic

[Yonghong Song]

On 8/2/25 1:48 AM, Jiawei Zhao wrote:
> When using GCC on x86-64 to compile an usdt prog with -O1 or higher
> optimization, the compiler will generate SIB addressing mode for global
> array and PC-relative addressing mode for global variable,
> e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" and "-1@4+t1(%rip)".
>
> In this patch:
> - force -O2 optimization for usdt.test.o to generate SIB addressing usdt
>    argument spec.
> - change the global variable t1 to a local variable, to avoid compiler
>    generating PC-relative addressing mode for it.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  8 ++++++++
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
>   2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> index 910d8d6402ef..4b77d06d5c42 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
> @@ -759,6 +759,14 @@ TRUNNER_BPF_BUILD_RULE := $$(error no BPF objects should be built)
>   TRUNNER_BPF_CFLAGS :=
>   $(eval $(call DEFINE_TEST_RUNNER,test_maps))
>   
> +# Force usdt.c to use -O2 optimization to generate SIB addressing
> +# Only apply on x86 architecture where SIB addressing is relevant
> +ifeq ($(ARCH), x86)
> +$(OUTPUT)/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
> +$(OUTPUT)/cpuv4/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
> +$(OUTPUT)/no_alu32/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
> +endif

This is no good. You should not change from -O0 to -O2. The existing usdt.c
test should be kept. I assume at -O0 level, the compiler probably
won't generate SIB pattern.

You could add another usdt test e.g. usdt_o2.c and force
usdt_o2 is compiled with -O2 optimizations and in usdt_o2 focusing on
SIB probe.

> +
>   # Define test_verifier test runner.
>   # It is much simpler than test_maps/test_progs and sufficiently different from
>   # them (e.g., test.h is using completely pattern), that it's worth just
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
> index 495d66414b57..86f354d25aef 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
> @@ -14,10 +14,15 @@ static volatile int idx = 2;
>   static volatile __u64 bla = 0xFEDCBA9876543210ULL;
>   static volatile short nums[] = {-1, -2, -3, -4};
>   
> -static volatile struct {
> -	int x;
> -	signed char y;
> -} t1 = { 1, -127 };
> +/*
> + * TODO:  At O2 optimization level, t1's USDT argument spec becomes -1@4+t1(%rip).
> + * Since libbpf doesn't support RIP addressing mode yet, this causes "unrecognized register" errors.
> + * This test will be re-enabled once libbpf supports RIP addressing mode.
> + */
> +// static volatile struct {
> +//	int x;
> +//	signed char y;
> +// } t1 = { 1, -127 };
>   

[...]

Re:Re: [PATCH v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Force -O2 for USDT selftests to cover SIB handling logic

[赵佳炜]

OK, I’ve already added an usdt_o2 test and passed it. 




At 2025-08-06 03:42:22, "Yonghong Song" <yonghong.song@linux.dev> wrote:
>
>
>On 8/2/25 1:48 AM, Jiawei Zhao wrote:
>> When using GCC on x86-64 to compile an usdt prog with -O1 or higher
>> optimization, the compiler will generate SIB addressing mode for global
>> array and PC-relative addressing mode for global variable,
>> e.g. "1@-96(%rbp,%rax,8)" and "-1@4+t1(%rip)".
>>
>> In this patch:
>> - force -O2 optimization for usdt.test.o to generate SIB addressing usdt
>>    argument spec.
>> - change the global variable t1 to a local variable, to avoid compiler
>>    generating PC-relative addressing mode for it.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jiawei Zhao <phoenix500526@163.com>
>> ---
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  8 ++++++++
>>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c | 18 ++++++++++++------
>>   2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> index 910d8d6402ef..4b77d06d5c42 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
>> @@ -759,6 +759,14 @@ TRUNNER_BPF_BUILD_RULE := $$(error no BPF objects should be built)
>>   TRUNNER_BPF_CFLAGS :=
>>   $(eval $(call DEFINE_TEST_RUNNER,test_maps))
>>   
>> +# Force usdt.c to use -O2 optimization to generate SIB addressing
>> +# Only apply on x86 architecture where SIB addressing is relevant
>> +ifeq ($(ARCH), x86)
>> +$(OUTPUT)/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
>> +$(OUTPUT)/cpuv4/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
>> +$(OUTPUT)/no_alu32/usdt.test.o: CFLAGS:=$(subst O0,O2,$(CFLAGS))
>> +endif
>
>This is no good. You should not change from -O0 to -O2. The existing usdt.c
>test should be kept. I assume at -O0 level, the compiler probably
>won't generate SIB pattern.
>
>You could add another usdt test e.g. usdt_o2.c and force
>usdt_o2 is compiled with -O2 optimizations and in usdt_o2 focusing on
>SIB probe.
>
>> +
>>   # Define test_verifier test runner.
>>   # It is much simpler than test_maps/test_progs and sufficiently different from
>>   # them (e.g., test.h is using completely pattern), that it's worth just
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
>> index 495d66414b57..86f354d25aef 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/usdt.c
>> @@ -14,10 +14,15 @@ static volatile int idx = 2;
>>   static volatile __u64 bla = 0xFEDCBA9876543210ULL;
>>   static volatile short nums[] = {-1, -2, -3, -4};
>>   
>> -static volatile struct {
>> -	int x;
>> -	signed char y;
>> -} t1 = { 1, -127 };
>> +/*
>> + * TODO:  At O2 optimization level, t1's USDT argument spec becomes -1@4+t1(%rip).
>> + * Since libbpf doesn't support RIP addressing mode yet, this causes "unrecognized register" errors.
>> + * This test will be re-enabled once libbpf supports RIP addressing mode.
>> + */
>> +// static volatile struct {
>> +//	int x;
>> +//	signed char y;
>> +// } t1 = { 1, -127 };
>>   
>
>[...]