public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Jose E . Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>,
	kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>,
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 16/18] bpf, arm64: Map BPF_REG_0 to x8 instead of x7
Date: Fri, 24 Apr 2026 10:17:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260424171718.2057293-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260424171433.2034470-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>

From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>

Move the BPF return value register from x7 to x8, freeing x7 for use
as an argument register. AAPCS64 designates x8 as the indirect result
location register; it is caller-saved and not used for argument
passing, making it a suitable home for BPF_REG_0.

This is a prerequisite for stack argument support, which needs x5-x7
to pass arguments 6-8 to native kfuncs following the AAPCS64 calling
convention.

Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c                          |  4 ++--
 arch/arm64/net/bpf_timed_may_goto.S                    |  8 ++++----
 .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_jit_inline.c  |  2 +-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_ldsx.c      |  6 +++---
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_private_stack.c       | 10 +++++-----
 5 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 0816c40fc7af..085e650662e3 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@
 /* Map BPF registers to A64 registers */
 static const int bpf2a64[] = {
 	/* return value from in-kernel function, and exit value from eBPF */
-	[BPF_REG_0] = A64_R(7),
+	[BPF_REG_0] = A64_R(8),
 	/* arguments from eBPF program to in-kernel function */
 	[BPF_REG_1] = A64_R(0),
 	[BPF_REG_2] = A64_R(1),
@@ -1048,7 +1048,7 @@ static void build_epilogue(struct jit_ctx *ctx, bool was_classic)
 	/* Restore FP/LR registers */
 	emit(A64_POP(A64_FP, A64_LR, A64_SP), ctx);
 
-	/* Move the return value from bpf:r0 (aka x7) to x0 */
+	/* Move the return value from bpf:r0 (aka x8) to x0 */
 	emit(A64_MOV(1, A64_R(0), r0), ctx);
 
 	/* Authenticate lr */
diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_timed_may_goto.S b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_timed_may_goto.S
index 894cfcd7b241..a9a802711a7f 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_timed_may_goto.S
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_timed_may_goto.S
@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(arch_bpf_timed_may_goto)
 	stp     x29, x30, [sp, #-64]!
 	mov     x29, sp
 
-	/* Save BPF registers R0 - R5 (x7, x0-x4)*/
-	stp	x7, x0, [sp, #16]
+	/* Save BPF registers R0 - R5 (x8, x0-x4)*/
+	stp	x8, x0, [sp, #16]
 	stp	x1, x2, [sp, #32]
 	stp	x3, x4, [sp, #48]
 
@@ -28,8 +28,8 @@ SYM_FUNC_START(arch_bpf_timed_may_goto)
 	/* BPF_REG_AX(x9) will be stored into count, so move return value to it. */
 	mov	x9, x0
 
-	/* Restore BPF registers R0 - R5 (x7, x0-x4) */
-	ldp	x7, x0, [sp, #16]
+	/* Restore BPF registers R0 - R5 (x8, x0-x4) */
+	ldp	x8, x0, [sp, #16]
 	ldp	x1, x2, [sp, #32]
 	ldp	x3, x4, [sp, #48]
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_jit_inline.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_jit_inline.c
index 4ea254063646..885ff69a3a62 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_jit_inline.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_jit_inline.c
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@ __success __retval(0)
 __arch_x86_64
 __jited("	addq	%gs:{{.*}}, %rax")
 __arch_arm64
-__jited("	mrs	x7, SP_EL0")
+__jited("	mrs	x8, SP_EL0")
 int inline_bpf_get_current_task(void)
 {
 	bpf_get_current_task();
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_ldsx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_ldsx.c
index c8494b682c31..c814e82a7242 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_ldsx.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_ldsx.c
@@ -274,11 +274,11 @@ __jited("movslq	0x10(%rdi,%r12), %r15")
 __jited("movswq	0x18(%rdi,%r12), %r15")
 __jited("movsbq	0x20(%rdi,%r12), %r15")
 __arch_arm64
-__jited("add	x11, x7, x28")
+__jited("add	x11, x8, x28")
 __jited("ldrsw	x21, [x11, #0x10]")
-__jited("add	x11, x7, x28")
+__jited("add	x11, x8, x28")
 __jited("ldrsh	x21, [x11, #0x18]")
-__jited("add	x11, x7, x28")
+__jited("add	x11, x8, x28")
 __jited("ldrsb	x21, [x11, #0x20]")
 __jited("add	x11, x0, x28")
 __jited("ldrsw	x22, [x11, #0x10]")
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_private_stack.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_private_stack.c
index 646e8ef82051..c5078face38d 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_private_stack.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_private_stack.c
@@ -170,12 +170,12 @@ __jited("	mrs	x10, TPIDR_EL{{[0-1]}}")
 __jited("	add	x27, x27, x10")
 __jited("	add	x25, x27, {{.*}}")
 __jited("	bl	0x{{.*}}")
-__jited("	mov	x7, x0")
+__jited("	mov	x8, x0")
 __jited("	mov	x0, #0x2a")
 __jited("	str	x0, [x27]")
 __jited("	bl	0x{{.*}}")
-__jited("	mov	x7, x0")
-__jited("	mov	x7, #0x0")
+__jited("	mov	x8, x0")
+__jited("	mov	x8, #0x0")
 __jited("	ldp	x25, x27, [sp], {{.*}}")
 __naked void private_stack_callback(void)
 {
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ __jited("	mov	x0, #0x2a")
 __jited("	str	x0, [x27]")
 __jited("	mov	x0, #0x0")
 __jited("	bl	0x{{.*}}")
-__jited("	mov	x7, x0")
+__jited("	mov	x8, x0")
 __jited("	ldp	x27, x28, [sp], #0x10")
 int private_stack_exception_main_prog(void)
 {
@@ -258,7 +258,7 @@ __jited("	add	x25, x27, {{.*}}")
 __jited("	mov	x0, #0x2a")
 __jited("	str	x0, [x27]")
 __jited("	bl	0x{{.*}}")
-__jited("	mov	x7, x0")
+__jited("	mov	x8, x0")
 __jited("	ldp	x27, x28, [sp], #0x10")
 int private_stack_exception_sub_prog(void)
 {
-- 
2.52.0


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-04-24 17:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-04-24 17:14 [PATCH bpf-next 00/18] bpf: Support stack arguments for BPF functions and kfuncs Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 01/18] bpf: Support stack arguments for bpf functions Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:13   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:09     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-27 20:40       ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-28 14:29   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-04-28 16:47     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-28 23:50       ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-29  0:28       ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-04-24 17:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 02/18] bpf: Add precision marking and backtracking for stack argument slots Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:10     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-28 16:46   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-04-28 20:54     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 03/18] bpf: Refactor record_call_access() to extract per-arg logic Yonghong Song
2026-04-29  0:51   ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-04-24 17:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 04/18] bpf: Extend liveness analysis to track stack argument slots Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:11     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 05/18] bpf: Reject stack arguments in non-JITed programs Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-24 17:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next 06/18] bpf: Prepare architecture JIT support for stack arguments Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:48   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:17     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next 07/18] bpf: Enable r11 based insns Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next 08/18] bpf: Support stack arguments for kfunc calls Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:19     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next 09/18] bpf: Reject stack arguments if tail call reachable Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-24 17:15 ` [PATCH bpf-next 10/18] bpf,x86: Implement JIT support for stack arguments Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:29     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 11/18] selftests/bpf: Add tests for BPF function " Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 12/18] selftests/bpf: Add tests for stack argument validation Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next 13/18] selftests/bpf: Add verifier " Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:48   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-25  5:33     ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next 14/18] selftests/bpf: Add BTF fixup for __naked subprog parameter names Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next 15/18] selftests/bpf: Add precision backtracking test for stack arguments Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:17 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-04-24 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next 17/18] bpf, arm64: Add JIT support " Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 18:00   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-27  9:06     ` Puranjay Mohan
2026-04-27 20:42       ` Yonghong Song
2026-04-24 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next 18/18] selftests/bpf: Enable stack argument tests for arm64 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=20260424171718.2057293-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    --to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
    --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@kernel.org \
    --cc=puranjay@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