From: Kaitao cheng <kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
To: martin.lau@linux.dev, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com,
kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com,
jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, chengkaitao@kylinos.cn,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v10 5/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add to insert node after a given list node
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:59:03 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260427165906.84420-6-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260427165906.84420-1-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
Add a new kfunc bpf_list_add(head, new, prev, meta, off) that
inserts 'new' after 'prev' in the BPF linked list. Both must be in
the same list; 'prev' must already be in the list. The new node must
be an owning reference (e.g. from bpf_obj_new); the kfunc consumes
that reference and the node becomes non-owning once inserted.
We have added an additional parameter bpf_list_head *head to
bpf_list_add, as the verifier requires the head parameter to
check whether the lock is being held.
Returns 0 on success, -EINVAL if 'prev' is not in a list or 'new'
is already in a list (or duplicate insertion). On failure, the
kernel drops the passed-in node.
Signed-off-by: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 11 +++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 12 +++++++++---
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 5388078f3171..2b8e8d4284a5 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2570,6 +2570,16 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_back_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
return bpf_list_push_back(head, node, meta__ign, off);
}
+__bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_add(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct bpf_list_node *new,
+ struct bpf_list_node *prev, struct btf_struct_meta *meta,
+ u64 off)
+{
+ struct bpf_list_node_kern *n = (void *)new, *p = (void *)prev;
+ struct list_head *prev_ptr = &p->list_head;
+
+ return __bpf_list_add(n, head, &prev_ptr, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
+}
+
static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
struct list_head *n)
{
@@ -4748,6 +4758,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_add, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_front, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_back, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_del, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 3c0e0076bd69..50f8732aa065 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -10742,6 +10742,7 @@ enum special_kfunc_type {
KF_bpf_list_push_front,
KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl,
KF_bpf_list_push_back,
+ KF_bpf_list_add,
KF_bpf_list_pop_front,
KF_bpf_list_pop_back,
KF_bpf_list_del,
@@ -10811,6 +10812,7 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_add)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_del)
@@ -10923,7 +10925,8 @@ static bool is_bpf_list_push_kfunc(u32 func_id)
return func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front] ||
func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front_impl] ||
func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back] ||
- func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl];
+ func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
+ func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_add];
}
static bool is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(u32 func_id)
@@ -19228,8 +19231,11 @@ int bpf_fixup_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
int struct_meta_reg = BPF_REG_3;
int node_offset_reg = BPF_REG_4;
- /* rbtree_add has extra 'less' arg, so args-to-fixup are in diff regs */
- if (is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(desc->func_id)) {
+ /* list_add/rbtree_add have an extra arg (prev/less),
+ * so args-to-fixup are in diff regs.
+ */
+ if (desc->func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_add] ||
+ is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(desc->func_id)) {
struct_meta_reg = BPF_REG_4;
node_offset_reg = BPF_REG_5;
}
--
2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-27 16:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-27 16:58 [PATCH bpf-next v10 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 16:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 1/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 18:43 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-28 13:52 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 2/8] bpf: clear list node owner and unlink before drop Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 18:43 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-28 14:08 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 3/8] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 18:43 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-28 14:32 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 4/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` Kaitao cheng [this message]
2026-04-27 18:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 5/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add to insert node after a given list node bot+bpf-ci
2026-04-28 14:18 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 6/8] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 7/8] bpf: allow non-owning list-node args via __nonown_allowed Kaitao cheng
2026-04-27 16:59 ` [PATCH bpf-next v10 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Kaitao cheng
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=20260427165906.84420-6-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--to=kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--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