From: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
jolsa@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
eddyz87@gmail.com, dxu@dxuuu.xyz, deso@posteo.net,
leon.hwang@linux.dev, kernel-patches-bot@fb.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v9 6/7] libbpf: Add BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags support for percpu maps
Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2025 23:39:41 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250930153942.41781-7-leon.hwang@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250930153942.41781-1-leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Add libbpf support for the BPF_F_CPU flag for percpu maps by embedding the
cpu info into the high 32 bits of:
1. **flags**: bpf_map_lookup_elem_flags(), bpf_map__lookup_elem(),
bpf_map_update_elem() and bpf_map__update_elem()
2. **opts->elem_flags**: bpf_map_lookup_batch() and
bpf_map_update_batch()
And the flag can be BPF_F_ALL_CPUS, but cannot be
'BPF_F_CPU | BPF_F_ALL_CPUS'.
Behavior:
* If the flag is BPF_F_ALL_CPUS, the update is applied across all CPUs.
* If the flag is BPF_F_CPU, it updates value only to the specified CPU.
* If the flag is BPF_F_CPU, lookup value only from the specified CPU.
* lookup does not support BPF_F_ALL_CPUS.
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h | 8 ++++++++
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 26 ++++++++++++++++++++------
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h | 21 ++++++++-------------
3 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
index e983a3e40d612..ffd93feffd71d 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
@@ -289,6 +289,14 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_map_lookup_and_delete_batch(int fd, void *in_batch,
* Update spin_lock-ed map elements. This must be
* specified if the map value contains a spinlock.
*
+ * **BPF_F_CPU**
+ * As for percpu maps, update value on the specified CPU. And the cpu
+ * info is embedded into the high 32 bits of **opts->elem_flags**.
+ *
+ * **BPF_F_ALL_CPUS**
+ * As for percpu maps, update value across all CPUs. This flag cannot
+ * be used with BPF_F_CPU at the same time.
+ *
* @param fd BPF map file descriptor
* @param keys pointer to an array of *count* keys
* @param values pointer to an array of *count* values
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index f92083f51bdb3..4f73a54c0a81f 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -10671,7 +10671,7 @@ bpf_object__find_map_fd_by_name(const struct bpf_object *obj, const char *name)
}
static int validate_map_op(const struct bpf_map *map, size_t key_sz,
- size_t value_sz, bool check_value_sz)
+ size_t value_sz, bool check_value_sz, __u64 flags)
{
if (!map_is_created(map)) /* map is not yet created */
return -ENOENT;
@@ -10698,6 +10698,20 @@ static int validate_map_op(const struct bpf_map *map, size_t key_sz,
int num_cpu = libbpf_num_possible_cpus();
size_t elem_sz = roundup(map->def.value_size, 8);
+ if (flags & (BPF_F_CPU | BPF_F_ALL_CPUS)) {
+ if ((flags & BPF_F_CPU) && (flags & BPF_F_ALL_CPUS)) {
+ pr_warn("map '%s': BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS are mutually exclusive\n",
+ map->name);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ if (map->def.value_size != value_sz) {
+ pr_warn("map '%s': unexpected value size %zu provided for either BPF_F_CPU or BPF_F_ALL_CPUS, expected %u\n",
+ map->name, value_sz, map->def.value_size);
+ return -EINVAL;
+ }
+ break;
+ }
+
if (value_sz != num_cpu * elem_sz) {
pr_warn("map '%s': unexpected value size %zu provided for per-CPU map, expected %d * %zu = %zd\n",
map->name, value_sz, num_cpu, elem_sz, num_cpu * elem_sz);
@@ -10722,7 +10736,7 @@ int bpf_map__lookup_elem(const struct bpf_map *map,
{
int err;
- err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true);
+ err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true, flags);
if (err)
return libbpf_err(err);
@@ -10735,7 +10749,7 @@ int bpf_map__update_elem(const struct bpf_map *map,
{
int err;
- err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true);
+ err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true, flags);
if (err)
return libbpf_err(err);
@@ -10747,7 +10761,7 @@ int bpf_map__delete_elem(const struct bpf_map *map,
{
int err;
- err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, 0, false /* check_value_sz */);
+ err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, 0, false /* check_value_sz */, flags);
if (err)
return libbpf_err(err);
@@ -10760,7 +10774,7 @@ int bpf_map__lookup_and_delete_elem(const struct bpf_map *map,
{
int err;
- err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true);
+ err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, value_sz, true, flags);
if (err)
return libbpf_err(err);
@@ -10772,7 +10786,7 @@ int bpf_map__get_next_key(const struct bpf_map *map,
{
int err;
- err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, 0, false /* check_value_sz */);
+ err = validate_map_op(map, key_sz, 0, false /* check_value_sz */, 0);
if (err)
return libbpf_err(err);
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
index 5118d0a90e243..7c38b2e546080 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.h
@@ -1196,12 +1196,13 @@ LIBBPF_API struct bpf_map *bpf_map__inner_map(struct bpf_map *map);
* @param key_sz size in bytes of key data, needs to match BPF map definition's **key_size**
* @param value pointer to memory in which looked up value will be stored
* @param value_sz size in byte of value data memory; it has to match BPF map
- * definition's **value_size**. For per-CPU BPF maps value size has to be
- * a product of BPF map value size and number of possible CPUs in the system
- * (could be fetched with **libbpf_num_possible_cpus()**). Note also that for
- * per-CPU values value size has to be aligned up to closest 8 bytes for
- * alignment reasons, so expected size is: `round_up(value_size, 8)
- * * libbpf_num_possible_cpus()`.
+ * definition's **value_size**. For per-CPU BPF maps, value size can be
+ * `value_size` if either **BPF_F_CPU** or **BPF_F_ALL_CPUS** is specified
+ * in **flags**, otherwise a product of BPF map value size and number of
+ * possible CPUs in the system (could be fetched with
+ * **libbpf_num_possible_cpus()**). Note also that for per-CPU values value
+ * size has to be aligned up to closest 8 bytes, so expected size is:
+ * `round_up(value_size, 8) * libbpf_num_possible_cpus()`.
* @flags extra flags passed to kernel for this operation
* @return 0, on success; negative error, otherwise
*
@@ -1219,13 +1220,7 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_map__lookup_elem(const struct bpf_map *map,
* @param key pointer to memory containing bytes of the key
* @param key_sz size in bytes of key data, needs to match BPF map definition's **key_size**
* @param value pointer to memory containing bytes of the value
- * @param value_sz size in byte of value data memory; it has to match BPF map
- * definition's **value_size**. For per-CPU BPF maps value size has to be
- * a product of BPF map value size and number of possible CPUs in the system
- * (could be fetched with **libbpf_num_possible_cpus()**). Note also that for
- * per-CPU values value size has to be aligned up to closest 8 bytes for
- * alignment reasons, so expected size is: `round_up(value_size, 8)
- * * libbpf_num_possible_cpus()`.
+ * @param value_sz refer to **bpf_map__lookup_elem**'s description.'
* @flags extra flags passed to kernel for this operation
* @return 0, on success; negative error, otherwise
*
--
2.51.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-09-30 15:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-30 15:39 [PATCH bpf-next v9 0/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags for percpu maps Leon Hwang
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 1/7] bpf: Introduce internal bpf_map_check_op_flags helper function Leon Hwang
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 2/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags Leon Hwang
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 3/7] bpf: Add BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags support for percpu_array maps Leon Hwang
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 4/7] bpf: Add BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags support for percpu_hash and lru_percpu_hash maps Leon Hwang
2025-10-06 22:29 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-08 4:48 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-13 23:17 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 5/7] bpf: Add BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags support for percpu_cgroup_storage maps Leon Hwang
2025-10-06 22:33 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2025-10-08 5:31 ` Leon Hwang
2025-09-30 15:39 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-09-30 15:39 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 7/7] selftests/bpf: Add cases to test BPF_F_CPU and BPF_F_ALL_CPUS flags Leon Hwang
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=20250930153942.41781-7-leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--to=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=deso@posteo.net \
--cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-patches-bot@fb.com \
--cc=song@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