public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 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,
	jose.marchesi@oracle.com, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/5] selftests/bpf: rename nocsr -> bpf_fastcall in selftests
Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 18:51:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240817015140.1039351-3-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240817015140.1039351-1-eddyz87@gmail.com>

Attribute used by LLVM implementation of the feature had been changed
from no_caller_saved_registers to bpf_fastcall (see [1]).
This commit replaces references to nocsr by references to bpf_fastcall
to keep LLVM and selftests parts in sync.

[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/101228

Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c       |  4 +--
 ...rifier_nocsr.c => verifier_bpf_fastcall.c} | 26 +++++++++----------
 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
 rename tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/{verifier_nocsr.c => verifier_bpf_fastcall.c} (95%)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
index f8f546eba488..c3b5a4164b92 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
@@ -53,7 +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_bpf_fastcall.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_or_jmp32_k.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_precision.skel.h"
 #include "verifier_prevent_map_lookup.skel.h"
@@ -176,7 +176,7 @@ 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_bpf_fastcall(void)         { RUN(verifier_bpf_fastcall); }
 void test_verifier_or_jmp32_k(void)           { RUN(verifier_or_jmp32_k); }
 void test_verifier_precision(void)            { RUN(verifier_precision); }
 void test_verifier_prevent_map_lookup(void)   { RUN(verifier_prevent_map_lookup); }
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bpf_fastcall.c
similarity index 95%
rename from tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c
rename to tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bpf_fastcall.c
index a7fe277e5167..f75cd5e3fffe 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_nocsr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bpf_fastcall.c
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ __naked void simple(void)
 	: __clobber_all);
 }
 
-/* The logic for detecting and verifying nocsr pattern is the same for
+/* The logic for detecting and verifying bpf_fastcall 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
@@ -52,7 +52,7 @@ __naked void simple(void)
  *
  * 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
+ * jit is correctly processed by bpf_fastcall logic, keep the rest of the
  * tests as x86.
  */
 SEC("raw_tp")
@@ -430,7 +430,7 @@ __naked static void bad_write_in_subprog_aux(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
 	"r0 = 1;"
-	"*(u64 *)(r1 - 0) = r0;"	/* invalidates nocsr contract for caller: */
+	"*(u64 *)(r1 - 0) = r0;"	/* invalidates bpf_fastcall contract for caller: */
 	"exit;"				/* caller stack at -8 used outside of the pattern */
 	::: __clobber_all);
 }
@@ -445,7 +445,7 @@ __naked void bad_helper_write(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
 	"r1 = 1;"
-	/* nocsr pattern with stack offset -8 */
+	/* bpf_fastcall pattern with stack offset -8 */
 	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 8) = r1;"
 	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
 	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 8);"
@@ -453,7 +453,7 @@ __naked void bad_helper_write(void)
 	"r1 += -8;"
 	"r2 = 1;"
 	"r3 = 42;"
-	/* read dst is fp[-8], thus nocsr rewrite not applied */
+	/* read dst is fp[-8], thus bpf_fastcall rewrite not applied */
 	"call %[bpf_probe_read_kernel];"
 	"exit;"
 	:
@@ -553,7 +553,7 @@ __arch_x86_64
 __log_level(4) __msg("stack depth 8")
 __xlated("2: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
 __success
-__naked void helper_call_does_not_prevent_nocsr(void)
+__naked void helper_call_does_not_prevent_bpf_fastcall(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
 	"r1 = 1;"
@@ -640,7 +640,7 @@ __naked int bpf_loop_interaction1(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
 	"r1 = 1;"
-	/* nocsr stack region at -16, but could be removed */
+	/* bpf_fastcall stack region at -16, but could be removed */
 	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
 	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
 	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
@@ -680,7 +680,7 @@ __naked int bpf_loop_interaction2(void)
 {
 	asm volatile (
 	"r1 = 42;"
-	/* nocsr stack region at -16, cannot be removed */
+	/* bpf_fastcall stack region at -16, cannot be removed */
 	"*(u64 *)(r10 - 16) = r1;"
 	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
 	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - 16);"
@@ -710,8 +710,8 @@ __msg("stack depth 512+0")
 __xlated("r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
 __success
 /* cumulative_stack_depth() stack usage is MAX_BPF_STACK,
- * called subprogram uses an additional slot for nocsr spill/fill,
- * since nocsr spill/fill could be removed the program still fits
+ * called subprogram uses an additional slot for bpf_fastcall spill/fill,
+ * since bpf_fastcall spill/fill could be removed the program still fits
  * in MAX_BPF_STACK and should be accepted.
  */
 __naked int cumulative_stack_depth(void)
@@ -749,7 +749,7 @@ __xlated("3: r0 = &(void __percpu *)(r0)")
 __xlated("4: r0 = *(u32 *)(r0 +0)")
 __xlated("5: exit")
 __success
-__naked int nocsr_max_stack_ok(void)
+__naked int bpf_fastcall_max_stack_ok(void)
 {
 	asm volatile(
 	"r1 = 42;"
@@ -771,7 +771,7 @@ __arch_x86_64
 __log_level(4)
 __msg("stack depth 520")
 __failure
-__naked int nocsr_max_stack_fail(void)
+__naked int bpf_fastcall_max_stack_fail(void)
 {
 	asm volatile(
 	"r1 = 42;"
@@ -779,7 +779,7 @@ __naked int nocsr_max_stack_fail(void)
 	"*(u64 *)(r10 - %[max_bpf_stack_8]) = r1;"
 	"call %[bpf_get_smp_processor_id];"
 	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - %[max_bpf_stack_8]);"
-	/* call to prandom blocks nocsr rewrite */
+	/* call to prandom blocks bpf_fastcall rewrite */
 	"*(u64 *)(r10 - %[max_bpf_stack_8]) = r1;"
 	"call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32];"
 	"r1 = *(u64 *)(r10 - %[max_bpf_stack_8]);"
-- 
2.45.2


  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-08-17  1:51 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-08-17  1:51 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/5] support bpf_fastcall patterns for calls to kfuncs Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-17  1:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/5] bpf: rename nocsr -> bpf_fastcall in verifier Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-22  1:14   ` Yonghong Song
2024-08-22  1:17   ` Yonghong Song
2024-08-22  1:43     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-17  1:51 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-08-22  1:20   ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/5] selftests/bpf: rename nocsr -> bpf_fastcall in selftests Yonghong Song
2024-08-17  1:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/5] bpf: support bpf_fastcall patterns for kfuncs Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-17 20:09   ` kernel test robot
2024-08-18  2:50     ` Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-22  1:23   ` Yonghong Song
2024-08-17  1:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/5] bpf: allow bpf_fastcall for bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx and bpf_rdonly_cast Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-22  1:23   ` Yonghong Song
2024-08-17  1:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: check if bpf_fastcall is recognized for kfuncs Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-22  1:38   ` Yonghong Song

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=20240817015140.1039351-3-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=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