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>,
	Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
	kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/13] bpf: Wire up JIT support for 16-byte kfunc returns
Date: Sat,  8 Aug 2026 12:03:37 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260808190337.1898362-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260808190322.1896580-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>

LLVM 23 returns an __int128, or a struct/union larger than 8 bytes and no
larger than 16 bytes, in the BPF R0:R2 register pair. The previous patch
taught the verifier about that convention; wire up the JIT side so that the
second half of the return value actually lands in R2.

A kfunc returning more than 8 bytes hands the second half of the result
back in RDX, the native x86-64 ABI's second return register. BPF R0 maps to
RAX so it needs no move, but BPF R2 maps to RSI, so emit a RDX->RSI move
after a BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL whose function model reports ret_size > 8.

Placing the second return half into R2 is possible on any JIT, but it needs
architecture-specific JIT work. Rather than requiring every JIT to
implement it at once, add a bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair()
capability, defaulting to false in the generic core; an architecture opts
in once its JIT handles the R0:R2 pair, and the remaining ones are left for
future work. The verifier enforces it in bpf_add_kfunc_call(), rejecting a
kfunc whose return is larger than 8 bytes with -EOPNOTSUPP when the JIT
lacks the capability. Only x86, arm64 and riscv are supported so far.

On arm64 and riscv the native second return register is already BPF R2 (x1
in bpf2a64[] and a1 in regmap[] respectively), so the value is in the R0:R2
register pair on return with no extra move, unlike x86 (RDX->RSI). This has
been tested on x86 and arm64. The riscv path is expected to work by the
same register-mapping reasoning as arm64 but has not been tested.

bpf_add_kfunc_call() also rejects a kfunc that is marked KF_FASTCALL and
returns more than 8 bytes. The bpf_fastcall contract implemented by
mark_fastcall_pattern_for_call() assumes a call clobbers R0 plus the
registers holding its arguments, so a return in the R0:R2 pair would
clobber an R2 the caller expects the fastcall pattern to preserve. Such
a kfunc is rejected with -EOPNOTSUPP as well.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c   |  5 +++++
 arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c |  5 +++++
 arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c     | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
 include/linux/filter.h          |  1 +
 kernel/bpf/core.c               |  5 +++++
 kernel/bpf/verifier.c           | 13 +++++++++++++
 6 files changed, 50 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index d14d297ebb96..a1febb4c5718 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -2330,6 +2330,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
 	return true;
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void)
 {
 	return true;
diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
index 6b9972b07c1b..c8e94d4657e9 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
+++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c
@@ -2111,6 +2111,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
 	return true;
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 bool bpf_jit_supports_ptr_xchg(void)
 {
 	return true;
diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 8dddb5d7af21..01c34114c850 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -2647,6 +2647,22 @@ st:			insn_off = insn->off;
 				return -EINVAL;
 			if (priv_frame_ptr)
 				pop_r9(&prog);
+			if (src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL) {
+				const struct btf_func_model *fm;
+
+				/*
+				 * A kfunc returning a >8 byte aggregate hands the
+				 * second half back in RDX (the native ABI's second
+				 * return reg), but BPF expects it in R0:R2. BPF R0
+				 * is RAX (no move needed), while BPF R2 is RSI, so
+				 * copy RDX into RSI.
+				 */
+				fm = bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(bpf_prog, insn);
+				if (!fm)
+					return -EFAULT;
+				if (fm->ret_size > 8)
+					emit_mov_reg(&prog, true, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3);
+			}
 			break;
 		}
 
@@ -4137,6 +4153,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
 	return true;
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void)
 {
 	return true;
diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
index 4edba8182db1..f3c34fd70f2d 100644
--- a/include/linux/filter.h
+++ b/include/linux/filter.h
@@ -1213,6 +1213,7 @@ bool bpf_jit_inlines_helper_call(s32 imm);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_subprog_tailcalls(void);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_percpu_insn(void);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void);
+bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_arena_args(void);
 bool bpf_jit_supports_far_kfunc_call(void);
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index a3e1fae32eac..d98f4220e875 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -3303,6 +3303,11 @@ bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void)
 	return false;
 }
 
+bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
+{
+	return false;
+}
+
 bool __weak bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void)
 {
 	return false;
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 58a177d26c46..eed96a795e8a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -2837,6 +2837,19 @@ int bpf_add_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, u32 func_id, u16 offset)
 	err = btf_distill_func_proto(&env->log, kfunc.btf, kfunc.proto, kfunc.name, &func_model);
 	if (err)
 		return err;
+	if (func_model.ret_size > 8) {
+		if (kfunc.flags && (*kfunc.flags & KF_FASTCALL)) {
+			verbose(env,
+				"kfunc %s with >8-byte return is not supported with KF_FASTCALL\n",
+				kfunc.name);
+			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+		}
+		if (!bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair()) {
+			verbose(env, "kfunc %s with >8-byte return is not supported by JIT\n",
+				kfunc.name);
+			return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+		}
+	}
 
 	memset(&meta, 0, sizeof(meta));
 	meta.btf = kfunc.btf;
-- 
2.53.0-Meta


  parent reply	other threads:[~2026-08-08 19:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-08-08 19:03 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/13] bpf: Support aggregate return values up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/13] bpf: Factor check_global_ret_scalar_reg() out of the global return check Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/13] bpf: Add helpers to describe the R0:R2 return register pair Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-08-08 19:39   ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/13] bpf: Wire up JIT support for 16-byte kfunc returns sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 16:29     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/13] bpf: Track R2 of register-pair returns in precision backtracking Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:29   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 16:30     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/13] bpf: Account R2 of register-pair returns in live register analysis Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/13] bpf: Reject callbacks returning more than 8 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:45   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 16:36     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:03 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/13] bpf: Add verifier support for 16-byte returns in R0:R2 Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:41   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 16:44     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/13] bpf: Reject register-pair returns when the subprog BTF is unreliable Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/13] bpf: Enable aggregate return types up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/13] selftests/bpf: Add C tests for 16-byte returns in R0:R2 Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:27   ` sashiko-bot
2026-08-10 16:51     ` Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/13] selftests/bpf: Add inline-asm and subprog tests for R0:R2 returns Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/13] selftests/bpf: Add tests for callbacks returning more than 8 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-08-08 19:04 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/13] Documentation/bpf: Document up to 16-byte kfunc return values in R0:R2 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=20260808190337.1898362-1-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=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
    /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