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 11/15] bpf, arm64: Move kfunc arguments into the arm64 calling convention
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 2026 08:50:10 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260911155010.2011265-1-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 arm64 calling
convention to satisfy the native requirement. AAPCS64 only ever moves an
argument to a higher slot, so the moves need one scratch register to carry
an eightbyte from one stack slot to another, and never the one a
convention moving an argument down would need.

In addition, the arena argument walk counts eightbytes rather than
parameters, as an argument may take two registers. The walk takes the
func model from the caller now, as the moves need it too, and runs first
so that they carry the rebased value.

btf_distill_func_proto() only bounds the argument count although a
by-value argument could take two slots. Similar to x86-64, let us support
up to MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS argument slots.

Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 92 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
 1 file changed, 81 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 3aa3ea0bc30b..bbde7c0836ae 100644
--- a/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -1220,6 +1220,12 @@ static int add_exception_handler(const struct bpf_insn *insn,
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static const struct bpf_jit_arg_abi arm64_arg_abi = {
+	.nr_arg_regs		= 8,
+	.even_reg_align		= true,
+	.even_stack_align	= true,
+};
+
 static const u8 stack_arg_reg[] = { A64_R(5), A64_R(6), A64_R(7) };
 
 #define NR_STACK_ARG_REGS	ARRAY_SIZE(stack_arg_reg)
@@ -1262,19 +1268,20 @@ static void emit_stack_arg_store_imm(s32 imm, s16 bpf_off, const u8 tmp, struct
  * kern_vm_start. A nullable arg preserves NULL by skipping the add, tested
  * on the truncated value as arena NULL is offset 0.
  */
-static int emit_kfunc_arena_args(struct jit_ctx *ctx, const struct bpf_insn *insn)
+static int emit_kfunc_arena_args(struct jit_ctx *ctx, const struct btf_func_model *fm)
 {
 	const u8 arena_vm_base = bpf2a64[ARENA_VM_START];
-	const struct btf_func_model *fm;
-	int i;
-
-	fm = bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(ctx->prog, insn);
-	if (!fm)
-		return -EINVAL;
+	int i, slot;
 
-	for (i = 0; i < min_t(int, fm->nr_args, MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS); i++) {
-		const u8 reg = bpf2a64[BPF_REG_1 + 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];
+		u8 reg;
+
+		if (slot + arg_regs > MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS)
+			break;
+		reg = bpf2a64[BPF_REG_1 + slot];
+		slot += arg_regs;
 
 		if (!(flags & BTF_FMODEL_ARENA_ARG))
 			continue;
@@ -1293,6 +1300,52 @@ static int emit_kfunc_arena_args(struct jit_ctx *ctx, const struct bpf_insn *ins
 	return 0;
 }
 
+static bool a64_arg_on_stack(u8 slot)
+{
+	return slot >= arm64_arg_abi.nr_arg_regs;
+}
+
+static s32 a64_arg_stack_off(u8 slot)
+{
+	return (slot - arm64_arg_abi.nr_arg_regs) * sizeof(u64);
+}
+
+/*
+ * Move the arguments AAPCS64 places somewhere other than the argument slot the
+ * BPF calling convention gave them. Slot N is X(N) up to the eighth, and the
+ * outgoing stack argument area from SP beyond it, both for the slot an
+ * argument comes from and for the one it goes to.
+ *
+ * AAPCS64 only ever moves an argument to a higher slot, so no move here ever
+ * takes BPF_JIT_ARG_TMP: bpf_jit_plan_arg_moves() hands out the scratch only
+ * for a convention that moves one down, which needs a register to carry the
+ * value past its own destination.
+ */
+static void emit_kfunc_arg_moves(struct jit_ctx *ctx, const struct btf_func_model *fm)
+{
+	struct bpf_jit_arg_move moves[BPF_JIT_MAX_ARG_MOVES];
+	const u8 tmp = bpf2a64[TMP_REG_1];
+	u32 i, n;
+
+	n = bpf_jit_plan_arg_moves(&arm64_arg_abi, fm, moves);
+
+	for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
+		u8 dst = moves[i].dst, src = moves[i].src, reg;
+
+		if (a64_arg_on_stack(src)) {
+			reg = tmp;
+			emit(A64_LDR64I(reg, A64_SP, a64_arg_stack_off(src)), ctx);
+		} else {
+			reg = src;
+		}
+
+		if (a64_arg_on_stack(dst))
+			emit(A64_STR64I(reg, A64_SP, a64_arg_stack_off(dst)), ctx);
+		else if (reg != dst)
+			emit(A64_MOV(1, dst, reg), ctx);
+	}
+}
+
 /* JITs an eBPF instruction.
  * Returns:
  * 0  - successfully JITed an 8-byte eBPF instruction.
@@ -1716,9 +1769,15 @@ static int build_insn(const struct bpf_verifier_env *env, const struct bpf_insn
 		if (ret < 0)
 			return ret;
 		if (insn->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL) {
-			ret = emit_kfunc_arena_args(ctx, insn);
+			const struct btf_func_model *fm;
+
+			fm = bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(ctx->prog, insn);
+			if (!fm)
+				return -EINVAL;
+			ret = emit_kfunc_arena_args(ctx, fm);
 			if (ret < 0)
 				return ret;
+			emit_kfunc_arg_moves(ctx, fm);
 		}
 		emit_call(func_addr, ctx);
 		/*
@@ -2393,6 +2452,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_ret_reg_pair(void)
 	return true;
 }
 
+const struct bpf_jit_arg_abi *bpf_jit_arg_abi(void)
+{
+	return &arm64_arg_abi;
+}
+
 bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void)
 {
 	return true;
@@ -2534,7 +2598,13 @@ struct arg_aux {
 static int calc_arg_aux(const struct btf_func_model *m,
 			 struct arg_aux *a)
 {
-	int stack_slots, nregs, slots, i;
+	int stack_slots, nregs, slots, i, total;
+
+	/* arm64 supports up to MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS argument slots */
+	for (i = 0, total = 0; i < m->nr_args; i++)
+		total += (m->arg_size[i] + 7) / 8;
+	if (total > MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS)
+		return -ENOTSUPP;
 
 	/* verifier ensures m->nr_args <= MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS */
 	for (i = 0, nregs = 0; i < m->nr_args; i++) {
-- 
2.52.0


  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 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/15] bpf, x86: Move kfunc arguments into the x86-64 calling convention Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 16:47   ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-09-12 17:14     ` Yonghong Song
2026-09-11 15:50 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2026-09-11 16:19   ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/15] bpf, arm64: Move kfunc arguments into the arm64 " 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=20260911155010.2011265-1-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