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 v4 12/15] libbpf: rewrite btf datasec names starting from '?'
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 12:45:26 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240306104529.6453-13-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240306104529.6453-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>
Optional struct_ops maps are defined using question mark at the start
of the section name, e.g.:
SEC("?.struct_ops")
struct test_ops optional_map = { ... };
This commit teaches libbpf to detect if kernel allows '?' prefix
in datasec names, and if it doesn't then to rewrite such names
by replacing '?' with '_', e.g.:
DATASEC ?.struct_ops -> DATASEC _.struct_ops
Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
tools/lib/bpf/features.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 19 +++++++++++++++++--
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h | 2 ++
3 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
index 6b0738ad7063..4e783cc7fc4b 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
@@ -147,6 +147,25 @@ static int probe_kern_btf_datasec(int token_fd)
strs, sizeof(strs), token_fd));
}
+static int probe_kern_btf_qmark_datasec(int token_fd)
+{
+ static const char strs[] = "\0x\0?.data";
+ /* static int a; */
+ __u32 types[] = {
+ /* int */
+ BTF_TYPE_INT_ENC(0, BTF_INT_SIGNED, 0, 32, 4), /* [1] */
+ /* VAR x */ /* [2] */
+ BTF_TYPE_ENC(1, BTF_INFO_ENC(BTF_KIND_VAR, 0, 0), 1),
+ BTF_VAR_STATIC,
+ /* DATASEC ?.data */ /* [3] */
+ BTF_TYPE_ENC(3, BTF_INFO_ENC(BTF_KIND_DATASEC, 0, 1), 4),
+ BTF_VAR_SECINFO_ENC(2, 0, 4),
+ };
+
+ return probe_fd(libbpf__load_raw_btf((char *)types, sizeof(types),
+ strs, sizeof(strs), token_fd));
+}
+
static int probe_kern_btf_float(int token_fd)
{
static const char strs[] = "\0float";
@@ -534,6 +553,9 @@ static struct kern_feature_desc {
[FEAT_ARG_CTX_TAG] = {
"kernel-side __arg_ctx tag", probe_kern_arg_ctx_tag,
},
+ [FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC] = {
+ "BTF DATASEC names starting from '?'", probe_kern_btf_qmark_datasec,
+ },
};
bool feat_supported(struct kern_feature_cache *cache, enum kern_feature_id feat_id)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index ec0f508b853d..672fca94ff53 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -2869,6 +2869,11 @@ static bool section_have_execinstr(struct bpf_object *obj, int idx)
return sh->sh_flags & SHF_EXECINSTR;
}
+static bool starts_with_qmark(const char *s)
+{
+ return s && s[0] == '?';
+}
+
static bool btf_needs_sanitization(struct bpf_object *obj)
{
bool has_func_global = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_GLOBAL_FUNC);
@@ -2878,9 +2883,10 @@ static bool btf_needs_sanitization(struct bpf_object *obj)
bool has_decl_tag = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_DECL_TAG);
bool has_type_tag = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_TYPE_TAG);
bool has_enum64 = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_ENUM64);
+ bool has_qmark_datasec = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC);
return !has_func || !has_datasec || !has_func_global || !has_float ||
- !has_decl_tag || !has_type_tag || !has_enum64;
+ !has_decl_tag || !has_type_tag || !has_enum64 || !has_qmark_datasec;
}
static int bpf_object__sanitize_btf(struct bpf_object *obj, struct btf *btf)
@@ -2892,6 +2898,7 @@ static int bpf_object__sanitize_btf(struct bpf_object *obj, struct btf *btf)
bool has_decl_tag = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_DECL_TAG);
bool has_type_tag = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_TYPE_TAG);
bool has_enum64 = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_ENUM64);
+ bool has_qmark_datasec = kernel_supports(obj, FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC);
int enum64_placeholder_id = 0;
struct btf_type *t;
int i, j, vlen;
@@ -2918,7 +2925,7 @@ static int bpf_object__sanitize_btf(struct bpf_object *obj, struct btf *btf)
name = (char *)btf__name_by_offset(btf, t->name_off);
while (*name) {
- if (*name == '.')
+ if (*name == '.' || *name == '?')
*name = '_';
name++;
}
@@ -2933,6 +2940,14 @@ static int bpf_object__sanitize_btf(struct bpf_object *obj, struct btf *btf)
vt = (void *)btf__type_by_id(btf, v->type);
m->name_off = vt->name_off;
}
+ } else if (!has_qmark_datasec && btf_is_datasec(t) &&
+ starts_with_qmark(btf__name_by_offset(btf, t->name_off))) {
+ /* replace '?' prefix with '_' for DATASEC names */
+ char *name;
+
+ name = (char *)btf__name_by_offset(btf, t->name_off);
+ if (name[0] == '?')
+ name[0] = '_';
} else if (!has_func && btf_is_func_proto(t)) {
/* replace FUNC_PROTO with ENUM */
vlen = btf_vlen(t);
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
index ad936ac5e639..864b36177424 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
@@ -374,6 +374,8 @@ enum kern_feature_id {
FEAT_UPROBE_MULTI_LINK,
/* Kernel supports arg:ctx tag (__arg_ctx) for global subprogs natively */
FEAT_ARG_CTX_TAG,
+ /* Kernel supports '?' at the front of datasec names */
+ FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC,
__FEAT_CNT,
};
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-06 10:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-06 10:45 [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] libbpf: type suffixes and autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 01/15] libbpf: allow version suffixes (___smth) for struct_ops types Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 02/15] libbpf: tie struct_ops programs to kernel BTF ids, not to local ids Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/15] libbpf: honor autocreate flag for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 04/15] selftests/bpf: test struct_ops map definition with type suffix Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 05/15] selftests/bpf: utility functions to capture libbpf log in test_progs Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 06/15] selftests/bpf: bad_struct_ops test Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 07/15] selftests/bpf: test autocreate behavior for struct_ops maps Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/15] libbpf: sync progs autoload with maps autocreate " Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 09/15] selftests/bpf: verify struct_ops autoload/autocreate sync Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 10/15] libbpf: replace elf_state->st_ops_* fields with SEC_ST_OPS sec_type Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 11/15] libbpf: struct_ops in SEC("?.struct_ops") / SEC("?.struct_ops.link") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 13/15] selftests/bpf: test case for SEC("?.struct_ops") Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 14/15] bpf: allow all printable characters in BTF DATASEC names Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 19:17 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-03-06 10:45 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 15/15] selftests/bpf: test cases for '?' in BTF names Eduard Zingerman
2024-03-06 19:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 00/15] libbpf: type suffixes and autocreate flag for struct_ops maps patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20240306104529.6453-13-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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox