BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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, puranjay@kernel.org,
	jose.marchesi@oracle.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC bpf-next v2 9/9] selftests/bpf: test no_caller_saved_registers spill/fill removal
Date: Thu,  4 Jul 2024 03:24:01 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240704102402.1644916-10-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240704102402.1644916-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>

Tests for no_caller_saved_registers processing logic
(see verifier.c:match_and_mark_nocsr_pattern()):
- a canary positive test case;
- a canary test case for arm64 and riscv64;
- various tests with broken patterns;
- tests with read/write fixed/varying stack access that violate nocsr
  stack access contract;
- tests with multiple subprograms.

Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c       |   2 +
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c      | 521 ++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 523 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
index 6816ff064516..8ca306c28e62 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
@@ -53,6 +53,7 @@
 #include "verifier_movsx.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_netfilter_ctx.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_netfilter_retcode.skel.h"
+#include "verifier_nocsr.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_precision.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_prevent_map_lookup.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_raw_stack.skel.h"
@@ -171,6 +172,7 @@ void test_verifier_meta_access(void)          { RUN(verifier_meta_access); }
 void test_verifier_movsx(void)                 { RUN(verifier_movsx); }
 void test_verifier_netfilter_ctx(void)        { RUN(verifier_netfilter_ctx); }
 void test_verifier_netfilter_retcode(void)    { RUN(verifier_netfilter_retcode); }
+void test_verifier_nocsr(void)                { RUN(verifier_nocsr); }
 void test_verifier_precision(void)            { RUN(verifier_precision); }
 void test_verifier_prevent_map_lookup(void)   { RUN(verifier_prevent_map_lookup); }
 void test_verifier_raw_stack(void)            { RUN(verifier_raw_stack); }
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..4e767d768f1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c
@@ -0,0 +1,521 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+#include <linux/bpf.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+#include "bpf_misc.h"
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("4: r5 = 5")
+__xlated("5: w0 = ")
+__xlated("6: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("7: r0 = *(u32 *)(r0 +0)")
+__xlated("8: exit")
+__success
+__naked void simple(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"r2 = 2;"
+	"r3 = 3;"
+	"r4 = 4;"
+	"r5 = 5;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 24) = r2;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 32) = r3;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 40) = r4;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 48) = r5;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r5 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 48);"
+	"r4 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 40);"
+	"r3 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 32);"
+	"r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 24);"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+/* The logic for detecting and verifying nocsr pattern is the same for
+ * any arch, however x86 differs from arm64 or riscv64 in a way
+ * bpf_get_smp_processor_id is rewritten:
+ * - on x86 it is done by verifier
+ * - on arm64 and riscv64 it is done by jit
+ *
+ * Which leads to different xlated patterns for different archs:
+ * - on x86 the call is expanded as 3 instructions
+ * - on arm64 and riscv64 the call remains as is
+ *   (but spills/fills are still removed)
+ *
+ * It is really desirable to check instruction indexes in the xlated
+ * patterns, so add this canary test to check that function rewrite by
+ * jit is correctly processed by nocsr logic, keep the rest of the
+ * tests as x86.
+ */
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_arm64
+__arch_riscv64
+__xlated("0: r1 = 1")
+__xlated("1: call bpf_get_smp_processor_id")
+__xlated("2: exit")
+__success
+__naked void canary_arm64_riscv64(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("3: exit")
+__success
+__naked void canary_zero_spills(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_reg_in_pattern1(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r6")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_reg_in_pattern2(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r6 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r6;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r6 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r0")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_reg_in_pattern3(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r0 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r0;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r0 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("2: *(u64 *)(r2 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("4: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("6: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_base_in_pattern(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"r2 = r10;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r2 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r2 = 1")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_insn_in_pattern(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r2 = 1;"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("2: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("4: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("6: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_off_in_pattern1(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u32 *)(r10 -4) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 -4)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_off_in_pattern2(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u32 *)(r10 - 4) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 - 4);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u32 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void wrong_size_in_pattern(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u32 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("2: *(u32 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("4: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("6: r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 -8)")
+__success
+__naked void partial_pattern(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"r2 = 2;"
+	"*(u32 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r2;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"r1 = *(u32 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("0: r1 = 1")
+__xlated("1: r2 = 2")
+/* not patched, spills for -8, -16 not removed */
+__xlated("2: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("3: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r2")
+__xlated("5: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("7: r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__xlated("8: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+/* patched, spills for -16, -24 removed */
+__xlated("10: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("12: exit")
+__success
+__naked void min_stack_offset(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"r2 = 2;"
+	/* this call won't be patched */
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r2;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	/* this call would be patched */
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 24) = r2;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r2 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 24);"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+__success
+__naked void bad_fixed_read(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += -8;"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 - 0);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+__success
+__naked void bad_fixed_write(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += -8;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r1 - 0) = r1;"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("6: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("8: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("10: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void bad_varying_read(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r6 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0);" /* random scalar value */
+	"r6 &= 0x7;"		 /* r6 range [0..7] */
+	"r6 += 0x2;"		 /* r6 range [2..9] */
+	"r7 = 0;"
+	"r7 -= r6;"		 /* r7 range [-9..-2] */
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += r7;"
+	"r1 = *(u8 *)(r1 - 0);" /* touches slot [-16..-9] where spills are stored */
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("6: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("8: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("10: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -16)")
+__success
+__naked void bad_varying_write(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r6 = *(u64 *)(r1 + 0);" /* random scalar value */
+	"r6 &= 0x7;"		 /* r6 range [0..7] */
+	"r6 += 0x2;"		 /* r6 range [2..9] */
+	"r7 = 0;"
+	"r7 -= r6;"		 /* r7 range [-9..-2] */
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += r7;"
+	"*(u8 *)(r1 - 0) = r7;" /* touches slot [-16..-9] where spills are stored */
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+__success
+__naked void bad_write_in_subprog(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += -8;"
+	"call bad_write_in_subprog_aux;"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+__used
+__naked static void bad_write_in_subprog_aux(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r0 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r1 - 0) = r0;"	/* invalidates nocsr contract for caller: */
+	"exit;"				/* caller stack at -8 used outside of the pattern */
+	::: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+/* main, not patched */
+__xlated("1: *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = r1")
+__xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("5: r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 -8)")
+__xlated("9: call pc+1")
+__xlated("10: exit")
+/* subprogram, patched */
+__xlated("11: r1 = 1")
+__xlated("13: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("15: exit")
+__success
+__naked void invalidate_one_subprog(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"r1 = r10;"
+	"r1 += -8;"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r1 - 0);"
+	"call invalidate_one_subprog_aux;"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+__used
+__naked static void invalidate_one_subprog_aux(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+SEC("raw_tp")
+__arch_x86_64
+/* main */
+__xlated("0: r1 = 1")
+__xlated("2: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("4: call pc+1")
+__xlated("5: exit")
+/* subprogram */
+__xlated("6: r1 = 1")
+__xlated("8: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
+__xlated("10: *(u64 *)(r10 -16) = r1")
+__xlated("11: exit")
+__success
+__naked void subprogs_use_independent_offsets(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
+	"call subprogs_use_independent_offsets_aux;"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+__used
+__naked static void subprogs_use_independent_offsets_aux(void)
+{
+	asm volatile (
+	"r1 = 1;"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 24) = r1;"
+	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
+	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 24);"
+	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
+	"exit;"
+	:
+	: __imm(bpf_get_smp_processor_id)
+	: __clobber_all);
+}
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
-- 
2.45.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-07-04 10:24 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-07-04 10:23 [RFC bpf-next v2 0/9] no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 1/9] bpf: add a get_helper_proto() utility function Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-09 23:42   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10  0:26     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 2/9] bpf: no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-09 23:42   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10  3:00     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10  6:01       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10  7:57         ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10 15:36           ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10 16:15             ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10 17:50               ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10 18:40                 ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10 18:49                   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10 19:03                     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10 19:16                       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10 19:07                   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-10 19:17                     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10 19:01             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-10  9:46     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10 15:23       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-10  1:09   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-10  3:06     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 3/9] bpf, x86, riscv, arm: no_caller_saved_registers for bpf_get_smp_processor_id() Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 4/9] selftests/bpf: extract utility function for BPF disassembly Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-09 23:46   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 5/9] selftests/bpf: no need to track next_match_pos in struct test_loader Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 6/9] selftests/bpf: extract test_loader->expect_msgs as a data structure Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:23 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 7/9] selftests/bpf: allow checking xlated programs in verifier_* tests Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-04 10:24 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 8/9] selftests/bpf: __arch_* macro to limit test cases to specific archs Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-09 23:50   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-07-04 10:24 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-07-08 11:44 ` [RFC bpf-next v2 0/9] no_caller_saved_registers attribute for helper calls Puranjay Mohan
2024-07-08 17:29   ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-07-10  1:18 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2024-07-10  3:35   ` Eduard Zingerman

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=20240704102402.1644916-10-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=jose.marchesi@oracle.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=puranjay@kernel.org \
    --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