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 10/15] bpf, x86: Move kfunc arguments into the x86-64 calling convention
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:50:05 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911155005.2010021-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260911154914.2004336-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Do the proper move from the BPF calling convention to the x86-64 calling
convention to satisfy the native requirement.
In addition, the arena argument walk counts eightbytes rather than
parameters, as an argument may take two registers.
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 70 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index bba351944202..0496607a7003 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -1839,6 +1839,60 @@ static int emit_spectre_bhb_barrier(u8 **pprog, u8 *ip,
return 0;
}
+static const struct bpf_jit_arg_abi x86_arg_abi = {
+ .nr_arg_regs = 6,
+ .backfill_after_stack = true,
+ .even_stack_align = true,
+};
+
+static const u8 x86_arg_reg[] = {
+ BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5, X86_REG_R9,
+};
+
+/*
+ * Move the arguments the x86-64 ABI places somewhere other than the argument
+ * slot the BPF calling convention gave them. @stack_base addresses the
+ * outgoing stack argument area from RBP. Return the number of emitted bytes.
+ */
+static int emit_kfunc_arg_moves(const struct btf_func_model *fm, s32 stack_base, u8 **pprog)
+{
+ struct bpf_jit_arg_move moves[BPF_JIT_MAX_ARG_MOVES];
+ const u8 nreg = x86_arg_abi.nr_arg_regs;
+ u8 *prog = *pprog, *start = prog;
+ u32 i, n;
+
+ n = bpf_jit_plan_arg_moves(&x86_arg_abi, fm, moves);
+
+ for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
+ u8 dst = moves[i].dst, src = moves[i].src, reg;
+ bool dst_mem = dst != BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP && dst >= nreg;
+ bool src_mem = src != BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP && src >= nreg;
+
+ /* Take the value into a register. */
+ if (src == BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP) {
+ reg = AUX_REG;
+ } else if (src_mem) {
+ reg = dst_mem || dst == BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP ? BPF_REG_AX : x86_arg_reg[dst];
+ emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, reg, BPF_REG_FP,
+ stack_base + (src - nreg) * 8);
+ } else {
+ reg = x86_arg_reg[src];
+ }
+
+ /* And leave it where the argument belongs. */
+ if (dst == BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP)
+ emit_mov_reg(&prog, true, AUX_REG, reg);
+ else if (dst_mem)
+ emit_stx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, reg,
+ stack_base + (dst - nreg) * 8);
+ else if (reg != x86_arg_reg[dst])
+ emit_mov_reg(&prog, true, x86_arg_reg[dst], reg);
+ }
+
+ *pprog = prog;
+ return prog - start;
+}
+
/*
* Rebase the __arena args of a kfunc call to arena kernel addresses,
* rN = kern_vm_start + (u32)rN, with R12 holding kern_vm_start. A nullable
@@ -1850,11 +1904,17 @@ static int emit_kfunc_arena_args(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
{
u8 *prog = *pprog;
u8 *start = prog;
- int i;
+ int i, slot;
- for (i = 0; i < min_t(int, fm->nr_args, MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS); i++) {
+ for (i = 0, slot = 0; i < fm->nr_args; i++) {
+ u32 arg_regs = (fm->arg_size[i] + 7) / 8;
u8 flags = fm->arg_flags[i];
- u32 reg = BPF_REG_1 + i;
+ u32 reg;
+
+ if (slot + arg_regs > MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS)
+ break;
+ reg = BPF_REG_1 + slot;
+ slot += arg_regs;
if (!(flags & BTF_FMODEL_ARENA_ARG))
continue;
@@ -2837,6 +2897,8 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *
if (err < 0)
return err;
ip += err;
+ ip += emit_kfunc_arg_moves(fm, outgoing_arg_base -
+ outgoing_rsp, &prog);
}
if (priv_frame_ptr) {
push_r9(&prog);
@@ -4351,6 +4413,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
return true;
}
+const struct bpf_jit_arg_abi *bpf_jit_arg_abi(void)
+{
+ return &x86_arg_abi;
+}
+
bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void)
{
return true;
--
2.52.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 15:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-11 15:49 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/15] bpf: Support by-value struct and __int128 arguments Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/15] bpf: Read a kfunc's __sz argument only when it is in a register Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/15] selftests/bpf: Add a test for an __int128 by-value argument Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:07 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/15] bpf: Rename bpf_subprog_info::arg_cnt to arg_slot_cnt Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/15] bpf: Index global function arguments by argument slot Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/15] bpf: Support by-value struct arguments up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/15] bpf: Support __int128 as a by-value function argument Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/15] bpf: Rename bpf_call_summary::num_params to arg_slot_cnt Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/15] bpf: Recognize by-value struct and __int128 kfunc arguments Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:13 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/15] bpf: Prepare kfunc arguments for the JIT from an ABI description Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-09-11 16:47 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/15] bpf, x86: Move kfunc arguments into the x86-64 calling convention bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:14 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/15] bpf, arm64: Move kfunc arguments into the arm64 " Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:19 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-12 17:16 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:19 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/15] selftests/bpf: Add C tests for by-value arguments up to 16 bytes Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 13/15] selftests/bpf: Add inline-asm tests for by-value arguments Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:06 ` sashiko-bot
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 14/15] selftests/bpf: Add tests for by-value kfunc arguments Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:24 ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 15/15] selftests/bpf: Temporary hack to disable register mismatch in arm64 Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 3:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-09-12 17:30 ` 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=20260911155005.2010021-1-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