From: Vineet Gupta <gvineet@meta.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
memxor@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix build of callx tests with GCC
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:50:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19cc4e99-2351-4d8c-8edd-918eaf857d5f@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260924182104.261823-1-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
On 9/24/26 11:21 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>
> GCC doesn't support indirect calls in BPF:
>
> progs/verifier_callx.c: In function 'apply_op':
> progs/verifier_callx.c:977:1: error: indirect call in function, which are not supported by eBPF
> progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c: In function 'use_shape':
> progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c:746:1: error: indirect call in function, which are not supported by eBPF
GCC supports them under -mxbpf but unfortunately even that is broken.
> Build verifier_callx, verifier_callx_rodata and callx_rodata progs
> with clang only. Skip callx_rodata_lskel test when progs are built
> with GCC.
Can we do this slightly differently.
Following on same theme have been queued up in bpf-next
2026-08-24 48b69cc8825d selftests/bpf: Enable some of the blocked cpuv4
instruction tests for bpf-gcc
2026-08-24 8928f5ffdb65 selftests/bpf: Report placeholder tests as SKIP,
not OK
2026-08-24 b0eeb9e0f548 selftests/bpf: Name the remaining placeholder
programs dummy_test
>
> Fixes: e9b22d50796d ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for callx")
> Fixes: b018e998e645 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for callx through pointers in read-only data")
> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> ---
> .../bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c | 6 ++++
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++--
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c | 3 +-
> .../bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c | 3 +-
> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> index 96f6179f0492..6a43b880d730 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,12 @@ void test_callx_rodata_lskel(void)
> if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open"))
> return;
>
> + /* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> + if (skel->rodata->skip) {
> + test__skip();
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
We now have common skipping machinery using __skip, see further below.
> skel->rodata->bias = 7;
>
> if (!ASSERT_OK(callx_rodata_lskel__load(skel), "load"))
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> index 07ae2d1b6b8e..e3f8335f80f8 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> @@ -1,16 +1,21 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> /* callx through pointers to functions in .rodata, loaded by light skeleton */
>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
> #include <linux/bpf.h>
> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
>
> -typedef int (*op_fn)(int);
> -
> /* set by user space before the programs are loaded, it's in .rodata too */
> const volatile int bias = 1;
>
> int op_idx;
>
> +#ifdef __clang__
It unfortunatete that this doesn't have a compiler feature test macro
__BPF_FEATURE_* in clang or gcc. It seems we have existing
CAN_USE_BPF_ST and CAN_USE_GOTOL, maybe we can define CAN_USE_CALLX in
bpf_misc.h and use that as a gate, keeps one place for all such
__clang/gcc workaround definitions instead of them scattered all over. I
have a few pending patches which clean things up.
> +
> +const volatile bool skip = false;
> +
> +typedef int (*op_fn)(int);
> +
> static __noinline int add_bias(int x)
> {
> return x + bias;
> @@ -41,6 +46,25 @@ int both_ops(void *ctx)
> return ops[1](ops[0](4));
> }
>
> +#else
> +
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +const volatile bool skip = true;
> +
> +SEC("socket")
> +int select_op(void *ctx)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("socket")
> +int both_ops(void *ctx)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#endif
> +
This can be rewritten using exising skipping machinery as shown in
bpf-next patch: 8928f5ffdb65 ("selftests/bpf: Report placeholder tests
as SKIP, not OK")
#ifdef CAN_USE_CALLX
llvm_code
#else
__skip("gcc doesnt support callx")
int dummy_test(void *ctx)
{
return 0;
}
#endif
This avoids the explicit skipping logic.
> /* no callx here */
> SEC("socket")
> int read_bias(void *ctx)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> index ea3d3f97da31..bc31d0221f6a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@
> #include "bpf_misc.h"
> #include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
>
> -#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +#if (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)) && defined(__clang__)
>
> #define CALLX_INSN(DST, SRC, OFF, IMM) \
> BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL | BPF_X, DST, SRC, OFF, IMM)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> index 65d34769c8bf..db3169a1ddf6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@
> #include "bpf_misc.h"
> #include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
>
> -#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +#if (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)) && defined(__clang__)
Instead of __clang scattered all over, CAN_USE_CALLX in bpf_misc.h so
its one stop shop to clean things up in future.
BTW this is
Thx,
-Vineet
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Vineet Gupta <vineet.gupta@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
memxor@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix build of callx tests with GCC
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2026 23:50:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <19cc4e99-2351-4d8c-8edd-918eaf857d5f@linux.dev> (raw)
Message-ID: <20260925065039.zZulRzHCO_w7Y-awZ6_htxXIlyVMtQ2ChCANwECUEOs@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260924182104.261823-1-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
On 9/24/26 11:21 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>
> GCC doesn't support indirect calls in BPF:
>
> progs/verifier_callx.c: In function 'apply_op':
> progs/verifier_callx.c:977:1: error: indirect call in function, which are not supported by eBPF
> progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c: In function 'use_shape':
> progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c:746:1: error: indirect call in function, which are not supported by eBPF
GCC supports them under -mxbpf but unfortunately even that is broken.
> Build verifier_callx, verifier_callx_rodata and callx_rodata progs
> with clang only. Skip callx_rodata_lskel test when progs are built
> with GCC.
Can we do this slightly differently.
Following on same theme have been queued up in bpf-next
2026-08-24 48b69cc8825d selftests/bpf: Enable some of the blocked cpuv4
instruction tests for bpf-gcc
2026-08-24 8928f5ffdb65 selftests/bpf: Report placeholder tests as SKIP,
not OK
2026-08-24 b0eeb9e0f548 selftests/bpf: Name the remaining placeholder
programs dummy_test
>
> Fixes: e9b22d50796d ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for callx")
> Fixes: b018e998e645 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for callx through pointers in read-only data")
> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> ---
> .../bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c | 6 ++++
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c | 28 +++++++++++++++++--
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c | 3 +-
> .../bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c | 3 +-
> 4 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> index 96f6179f0492..6a43b880d730 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/callx_rodata_lskel.c
> @@ -35,6 +35,12 @@ void test_callx_rodata_lskel(void)
> if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open"))
> return;
>
> + /* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> + if (skel->rodata->skip) {
> + test__skip();
> + goto out;
> + }
> +
We now have common skipping machinery using __skip, see further below.
> skel->rodata->bias = 7;
>
> if (!ASSERT_OK(callx_rodata_lskel__load(skel), "load"))
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> index 07ae2d1b6b8e..e3f8335f80f8 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/callx_rodata.c
> @@ -1,16 +1,21 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> /* callx through pointers to functions in .rodata, loaded by light skeleton */
>
> +#include <stdbool.h>
> #include <linux/bpf.h>
> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
>
> -typedef int (*op_fn)(int);
> -
> /* set by user space before the programs are loaded, it's in .rodata too */
> const volatile int bias = 1;
>
> int op_idx;
>
> +#ifdef __clang__
It unfortunatete that this doesn't have a compiler feature test macro
__BPF_FEATURE_* in clang or gcc. It seems we have existing
CAN_USE_BPF_ST and CAN_USE_GOTOL, maybe we can define CAN_USE_CALLX in
bpf_misc.h and use that as a gate, keeps one place for all such
__clang/gcc workaround definitions instead of them scattered all over. I
have a few pending patches which clean things up.
> +
> +const volatile bool skip = false;
> +
> +typedef int (*op_fn)(int);
> +
> static __noinline int add_bias(int x)
> {
> return x + bias;
> @@ -41,6 +46,25 @@ int both_ops(void *ctx)
> return ops[1](ops[0](4));
> }
>
> +#else
> +
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +const volatile bool skip = true;
> +
> +SEC("socket")
> +int select_op(void *ctx)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("socket")
> +int both_ops(void *ctx)
> +{
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +#endif
> +
This can be rewritten using exising skipping machinery as shown in
bpf-next patch: 8928f5ffdb65 ("selftests/bpf: Report placeholder tests
as SKIP, not OK")
#ifdef CAN_USE_CALLX
llvm_code
#else
__skip("gcc doesnt support callx")
int dummy_test(void *ctx)
{
return 0;
}
#endif
This avoids the explicit skipping logic.
> /* no callx here */
> SEC("socket")
> int read_bias(void *ctx)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> index ea3d3f97da31..bc31d0221f6a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@
> #include "bpf_misc.h"
> #include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
>
> -#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +#if (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)) && defined(__clang__)
>
> #define CALLX_INSN(DST, SRC, OFF, IMM) \
> BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL | BPF_X, DST, SRC, OFF, IMM)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> index 65d34769c8bf..db3169a1ddf6 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_callx_rodata.c
> @@ -6,7 +6,8 @@
> #include "bpf_misc.h"
> #include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
>
> -#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)
> +/* gcc doesn't support indirect calls */
> +#if (defined(__TARGET_ARCH_x86) || defined(__TARGET_ARCH_arm64)) && defined(__clang__)
Instead of __clang scattered all over, CAN_USE_CALLX in bpf_misc.h so
its one stop shop to clean things up in future.
BTW this is
Thx,
-Vineet
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-25 6:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-24 18:21 [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Fix build of callx tests with GCC Alexei Starovoitov
2026-09-24 19:50 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-09-24 20:00 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2026-09-25 6:50 ` Vineet Gupta [this message]
2026-09-25 6:50 ` Vineet Gupta
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=19cc4e99-2351-4d8c-8edd-918eaf857d5f@linux.dev \
--to=gvineet@meta.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=memxor@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox