From: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: Menglong Dong <menglong.dong@linux.dev>,
Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-trace-kernel <linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
jiang.biao@linux.dev
Subject: Re: bpf_errno. Was: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 1/3] bpf: report probe fault to BPF stderr
Date: Thu, 9 Oct 2025 22:15:34 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <405caf71-315d-46a4-af35-c1fd53470b91@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAADnVQLxpUmjbsHeNizRMDkY1a4_gLD0VBFWS8QMYHzpYBs4EQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2025/10/9 00:27, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 7:41 AM Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2025/10/7 14:14, Menglong Dong wrote:
>>> On 2025/10/2 10:03, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>>> On Fri, Sep 26, 2025 at 11:12 PM Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
[...]
>>>
>>> Leon suggested to add a global errno for each BPF programs,
>>> and I haven't dig deeply on this idea yet.
>>>
>>
>> Yeah, as we discussed, a global errno would be a much more lightweight
>> approach for handling such faults.
>>
>> The idea would look like this:
>>
>> DEFINE_PER_CPU(int, bpf_errno);
>>
>> __bpf_kfunc void bpf_errno_clear(void);
>> __bpf_kfunc void bpf_errno_set(int errno);
>> __bpf_kfunc int bpf_errno_get(void);
>>
>> When a fault occurs, the kernel can simply call
>> 'bpf_errno_set(-EFAULT);'.
>>
>> If users want to detect whether a fault happened, they can do:
>>
>> bpf_errno_clear();
>> header = READ_ONCE(skb->network_header);
>> if (header == 0 && bpf_errno_get() == -EFAULT)
>> /* handle fault */;
>>
>> This way, users can identify faults immediately and handle them gracefully.
>>
>> Furthermore, these kfuncs can be inlined by the verifier, so there would
>> be no runtime function call overhead.
>
> Interesting idea, but errno as-is doesn't quite fit,
> since we only have 2 (or 3 ?) cases without explicit error return:
> probe_read_kernel above, arena read, arena write.
> I guess we can add may_goto to this set as well.
> But in all these cases we'll struggle to find an appropriate errno code,
> so it probably should be a custom enum and not called "errno".
To avoid introducing a global errno, here's a more lightweight approach:
1. Introduce an internal BPF_REG_AUX and a helper
'bpf_jit_supports_reg_aux()'.
2. Introduce a kfunc 'int bpf_reg_aux(void)'.
When a fault occurs, we can set 'BPF_REG_AUX = -EFAULT;' in
'ex_handler_bpf()'.
Otherwise, 'BPF_REG_AUX = 0;'.
(Alternatively, BPF_REG_AUX can use a custom enum instead of '-EFAULT'.)
If users want to check whether a fault happened, they can do:
header = READ_ONCE(skb->network_header);
if (header == 0 && bpf_reg_aux() == -EFAULT)
/* handle fault */;
This allows users to detect faults immediately without any extra global
state.
The verifier can rewrite 'bpf_reg_aux()' into the following instructions:
dst_reg = BPF_REG_AUX;
BPF_REG_AUX = 0; /* clear BPF_REG_AUX */
As for the architecture-specific implementation, BPF_REG_AUX can be
mapped to an appropriate register per arch — for example, r11 on x86_64.
The verifier would ensure that BPF_REG_AUX is not clobbered after a
probe read.
As a result, this avoids the need for a global errno and introduces no
runtime function call overhead.
Thanks,
Leon
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-09 14:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-27 6:12 [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/3] bpf: report probe fault to BPF stderr Menglong Dong
2025-09-27 6:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 1/3] " Menglong Dong
2025-10-02 2:03 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-07 6:14 ` Menglong Dong
2025-10-08 14:40 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-08 16:27 ` bpf_errno. Was: " Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-08 17:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-10-08 19:34 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-10-08 20:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-10-08 20:30 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-10-08 20:59 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-10-09 14:29 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-09 15:15 ` Leon Hwang
2025-10-10 12:05 ` Menglong Dong
2025-10-10 15:10 ` Menglong Dong
2025-10-10 18:55 ` Eduard Zingerman
2025-10-11 1:23 ` Menglong Dong
2025-10-09 14:15 ` Leon Hwang [this message]
2025-10-09 14:45 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-10-10 14:22 ` Leon Hwang
2025-09-27 6:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 2/3] x86,bpf: use bpf_prog_report_probe_violation for x86 Menglong Dong
2025-09-27 6:12 ` [PATCH RFC bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: add testcase for probe read fault Menglong Dong
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=405caf71-315d-46a4-af35-c1fd53470b91@gmail.com \
--to=hffilwlqm@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jiang.biao@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=menglong.dong@linux.dev \
--cc=menglong8.dong@gmail.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