From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>,
Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
kernel-team@meta.com, Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: arm64: Optimize recursion detection by not using atomics
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2025 15:35:57 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251217233608.2374187-3-puranjay@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251217233608.2374187-1-puranjay@kernel.org>
BPF programs detect recursion using a per-CPU 'active' flag in struct
bpf_prog. The trampoline currently sets/clears this flag with atomic
operations.
On some arm64 platforms (e.g., Neoverse V2 with LSE), per-CPU atomic
operations are relatively slow. Unlike x86_64 - where per-CPU updates
can avoid cross-core atomicity, arm64 LSE atomics are always atomic
across all cores, which is unnecessary overhead for strictly per-CPU
state.
This patch removes atomics from the recursion detection path on arm64 by
changing 'active' to a per-CPU array of four u8 counters, one per
context: {NMI, hard-irq, soft-irq, normal}. The running context uses a
non-atomic increment/decrement on its element. After increment,
recursion is detected by reading the array as a u32 and verifying that
only the expected element changed; any change in another element
indicates inter-context recursion, and a value > 1 in the same element
indicates same-context recursion.
For example, starting from {0,0,0,0}, a normal-context trigger changes
the array to {0,0,0,1}. If an NMI arrives on the same CPU and triggers
the program, the array becomes {1,0,0,1}. When the NMI context checks
the u32 against the expected mask for normal (0x00000001), it observes
0x01000001 and correctly reports recursion. Same-context recursion is
detected analogously.
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
---
include/linux/bpf.h | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
kernel/bpf/core.c | 3 ++-
2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
index 2da986136d26..5ca2a761d9a1 100644
--- a/include/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
@@ -31,6 +31,7 @@
#include <linux/static_call.h>
#include <linux/memcontrol.h>
#include <linux/cfi.h>
+#include <linux/unaligned.h>
#include <asm/rqspinlock.h>
struct bpf_verifier_env;
@@ -1746,6 +1747,8 @@ struct bpf_prog_aux {
struct bpf_map __rcu *st_ops_assoc;
};
+#define BPF_NR_CONTEXTS 4 /* normal, softirq, hardirq, NMI */
+
struct bpf_prog {
u16 pages; /* Number of allocated pages */
u16 jited:1, /* Is our filter JIT'ed? */
@@ -1772,7 +1775,7 @@ struct bpf_prog {
u8 tag[BPF_TAG_SIZE];
};
struct bpf_prog_stats __percpu *stats;
- int __percpu *active;
+ u8 __percpu *active; /* u8[BPF_NR_CONTEXTS] for rerecursion protection */
unsigned int (*bpf_func)(const void *ctx,
const struct bpf_insn *insn);
struct bpf_prog_aux *aux; /* Auxiliary fields */
@@ -2006,12 +2009,36 @@ struct bpf_struct_ops_common_value {
static inline bool bpf_prog_get_recursion_context(struct bpf_prog *prog)
{
- return this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) == 1;
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64
+ u8 rctx = interrupt_context_level();
+ u8 *active = this_cpu_ptr(prog->active);
+ u32 val;
+
+ preempt_disable();
+ active[rctx]++;
+ val = get_unaligned_le32(active);
+ preempt_enable();
+ if (val != BIT(rctx * 8))
+ return false;
+
+ return true;
+#else
+ return this_cpu_inc_return(*(int __percpu *)(prog->active)) == 1;
+#endif
}
static inline void bpf_prog_put_recursion_context(struct bpf_prog *prog)
{
- this_cpu_dec(*(prog->active));
+#ifdef CONFIG_ARM64
+ u8 rctx = interrupt_context_level();
+ u8 *active = this_cpu_ptr(prog->active);
+
+ preempt_disable();
+ active[rctx]--;
+ preempt_enable();
+#else
+ this_cpu_dec(*(int __percpu *)(prog->active));
+#endif
}
#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index c66316e32563..b5063acfcf92 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -112,7 +112,8 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog_alloc_no_stats(unsigned int size, gfp_t gfp_extra_flag
vfree(fp);
return NULL;
}
- fp->active = alloc_percpu_gfp(int, bpf_memcg_flags(GFP_KERNEL | gfp_extra_flags));
+ fp->active = __alloc_percpu_gfp(sizeof(u8[BPF_NR_CONTEXTS]), 8,
+ bpf_memcg_flags(GFP_KERNEL | gfp_extra_flags));
if (!fp->active) {
vfree(fp);
kfree(aux);
--
2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-12-17 23:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-12-17 23:35 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Optimize recursion detection on arm64 Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-17 23:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf: move recursion detection logic to helpers Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-18 17:44 ` Yonghong Song
2025-12-17 23:35 ` Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2025-12-18 17:55 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] bpf: arm64: Optimize recursion detection by not using atomics Yonghong Song
2025-12-19 16:40 ` Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-19 18:23 ` Puranjay Mohan
2025-12-18 2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] bpf: Optimize recursion detection on arm64 Puranjay Mohan
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=20251217233608.2374187-3-puranjay@kernel.org \
--to=puranjay@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
--cc=will@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