BPF List
 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>,
	kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Adjust fexit_bpf2bpf ctx layout for llvm23 true signature
Date: Tue,  9 Jun 2026 16:34:12 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260609233412.2712178-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260609233402.2711071-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>

test_pkt_access_subprog2() is defined in C as

  int test_pkt_access_subprog2(int val, volatile struct __sk_buff *skb)

but llvm optimizes away the unused 'int val' argument. Before llvm23 the
BTF signature did not match the optimized assembly, so the verifier set
attach_func_proto to NULL and fell back to MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS (5) u64
arguments (see btf_ctx_access()). The fexit ctx struct therefore placed
the return value after args[5].

With llvm23 the 'true' signature

  int test_pkt_access_subprog2(volatile struct __sk_buff *skb)

is recorded in BTF, so nr_args becomes 1 and the return value moves to
the slot right after args[1]. Select the matching args_subprog2 layout
based on __clang_major__ so the test works with both old and new llvm.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c | 13 +++++++++++--
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c
index 983b7c233382..f4bbf87b82dd 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_bpf2bpf.c
@@ -53,14 +53,23 @@ int BPF_PROG(test_subprog1, struct sk_buff *skb, int ret)
  *   r0 = *(u32 *)(r1 + 0)
  *   w0 <<= 1
  *   exit
- * In such case the verifier falls back to conservative and
+ * Before llvm23, in such case the verifier falls back to conservative and
  * tracing program can access arguments and return value as u64
- * instead of accurate types.
+ * instead of accurate types. With llvm23, the true signature
+ *   int test_pkt_access_subprog2(volatile struct __sk_buff *skb)
+ * is available in btf.
  */
+#if __clang_major__ >= 23
+struct args_subprog2 {
+	__u64 args[1];
+	__u64 ret;
+};
+#else
 struct args_subprog2 {
 	__u64 args[5];
 	__u64 ret;
 };
+#endif
 __u64 test_result_subprog2 = 0;
 SEC("fexit/test_pkt_access_subprog2")
 int test_subprog2(struct args_subprog2 *ctx)
-- 
2.53.0-Meta


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-06-09 23:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-09 23:34 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] selftests/bpf: Fix tests for llvm23 true signature Yonghong Song
2026-06-09 23:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] selftests/bpf: Keep int return type for tailcall subprogs Yonghong Song
2026-06-09 23:42   ` sashiko-bot
2026-06-10  3:41     ` Yonghong Song
2026-06-10  4:06     ` Yonghong Song
2026-06-10  0:07   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-06-10  3:45     ` Yonghong Song
2026-06-09 23:34 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-06-10  4:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/2] selftests/bpf: Fix tests for llvm23 true signature patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20260609233412.2712178-1-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=kernel-team@fb.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@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