BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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
Cc: eddyz87@gmail.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/5] bpf_loop inlining
Date: Fri,  3 Jun 2022 17:10:42 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220603141047.2163170-1-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)

Hi Everyone,

This is the next iteration of the patch. Please find updated intro
message and change log below.

This patch implements inlining of calls to bpf_loop helper function
when bpf_loop's callback is statically known. E.g. the rewrite does
the following transformation during BPF program processing:

  bpf_loop(10, foo, NULL, 0);

 ->

  for (int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
    foo(i, NULL);

The transformation leads to measurable latency change for simple
loops. 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.

The change is split in five parts:

* Update to test_verifier.c to specify expected and unexpected
  instruction sequences. This allows to check BPF program rewrites
  applied by do_mix_fixups function.

* Update to test_verifier.c to specify BTF function infos and types
  per test case. This is necessary for tests that load sub-program
  addresses to a variable because of the checks applied by
  check_ld_imm function.

* The update to verifier.c that tracks state of the parameters for
  each bpf_loop call in a program and decides whether it could be
  replaced by a loop.

* A set of test cases for `test_verifier` that use capabilities added
  by the first two patches to verify instructions produced by inlining
  logic.

* Two test cases for `test_prog` to check that possible corner cases
  behave as expected.

Additional details are available in commit messages for each patch.

Changes since v2:
 - fix for `stack_check` test case in `test_progs-no_alu32`, all tests
   are passing now;
 - v2 3/3 patch is split in three parts:
   - kernel changes
   - test_verifier changes
   - test_prog changes
 - updated `inline_bpf_loop` in `verifier.c` to calculate each offset
   used in instructions to avoid "magic" numbers;
 - removed newline handling logic in `fail_log` branch of
   `do_single_test` in `test_verifier.c` to simplify the patch set;
 - styling fixes suggested in review for v2 of this patch set.

Changes since v1:
 - allow to use SKIP_INSNS in instruction pattern specification in
   test_verifier tests;
 - fix for a bug in spill offset assignement for loop vars when
   bpf_loop is located in a non-main function.

Eduard Zingerman (5):
  selftests/bpf: specify expected instructions in test_verifier tests
  selftests/bpf: allow BTF specs and func infos in test_verifier tests
  bpf: Inline calls to bpf_loop when callback is known
  selftests/bpf: BPF test_verifier selftests for bpf_loop inlining
  selftests/bpf: BPF test_prog selftests for bpf_loop inlining

 include/linux/bpf_verifier.h                  |  16 +
 kernel/bpf/bpf_iter.c                         |   9 +-
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c                         | 199 ++++++++++-
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_loop.c       |  61 ++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/btf.c  |   1 -
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_loop.c  | 114 +++++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_btf.h        |   2 +
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c   | 316 +++++++++++++++++-
 .../selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c  | 244 ++++++++++++++
 9 files changed, 935 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c

-- 
2.25.1


             reply	other threads:[~2022-06-03 14:11 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-06-03 14:10 Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2022-06-03 14:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/5] selftests/bpf: specify expected instructions in test_verifier tests Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 21:31   ` Song Liu
2022-06-03 22:08     ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 23:01       ` Song Liu
2022-06-04 12:53         ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 14:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/5] selftests/bpf: allow BTF specs and func infos " Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 21:41   ` Song Liu
2022-06-03 14:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/5] bpf: Inline calls to bpf_loop when callback is known Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 22:36   ` Song Liu
2022-06-04  0:06   ` Joanne Koong
2022-06-04 12:51     ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-06 18:08       ` Joanne Koong
2022-06-08  9:06         ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-04 14:47   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-06-04 15:36     ` Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 14:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/5] selftests/bpf: BPF test_verifier selftests for bpf_loop inlining Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 22:38   ` Song Liu
2022-06-03 14:10 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 5/5] selftests/bpf: BPF test_prog " Eduard Zingerman
2022-06-03 22:52   ` 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=20220603141047.2163170-1-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=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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox