From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@linux.dev>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
dwarves@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH dwarves] btf_encoder: Infer arena kfunc arguments from suffixes
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2026 14:34:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4d20aecf677f4aec3e8e70106d4bdbcb01902e69.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6c9500d4-7401-44f0-93a6-88a827026ae0@linux.dev>
On Tue, 2026-08-04 at 14:19 -0700, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> On 8/4/26 1:22 PM, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> > On Tue, 2026-08-04 at 21:27 +0200, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > > On Tue Aug 4, 2026 at 8:43 PM CEST, Ihor Solodrai wrote:
> > > > On 8/3/26 5:55 AM, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > > > > [...]
> > >
> > > >
> > > > So while I understand the reluctance to add KF_ARENA_ARG3..N, I don't
> > > > think we want to introduce and support yet another mechanism for arena
> > > > argument annotations. If we do, we'll be stuck with a mess of
> > > > supporting two/three ways of doing the same thing for the foreseeable future.
> > >
> > > I think one major difference is that KF_ARENA_ARG* things were mostly for
> > > annotating the vmlinux.h with the right address space label before, but didn't
> > > carry any semantic meaning for the kfunc's type checks.
> > >
> > > That changes with these suffixes though. The pointer will be translated when
> > > passed into the kfunc. IMO it would be odd to diverge for this particular case,
> > > since we use suffixes for every other case where we constrain the input type of
> > > the kfunc argument or give it special meaning.
> > >
> > > We also want to have similar annotation on struct_ops callbacks, where we also
> > > use suffixes, so it seemed better to keep it consistent.
> >
> > I agree that we should follow the principle of least surprise here and
> > use suffixes, as everything else uses suffixes as well.
>
> Ok, I understand the motivation. Let's say we use the suffixes.
>
> Should this enable getting rid of KF_ARENA* flags then? For the
> purposes of generating address_space(1), we can also just check the
> name suffix, no?
That would be ideal, yes.
> >
> > And yes, the __arena and KF_ARENA_ARG* annotations have different
> > semantics:
> > - __arena means that user space arena address is passed as is
> > - KF_ARENA_ARG* means that a user space address is converted
> > to a kernel space address before passing.
>
> Also I am a little confused about whether we *need* to be able to
> express two distinct meanings of "arena pointer" or not?
>
> My understanding is that "arena pointer" is a feature of an arg type
> that has a single meaning: the pointer has one base in BPF world, and
> a different base when executed in the kernel.
>
> The things that are missing is auto-conversion (Tejun's RFC [1]) and more
> comprehensive support of PTR_TO_ARENA in the verifier.
>
> This is still only one "arena" annotation per arg. Do we actually need
> the proliferation of __arena, __arena__nullable and/or __arena_kern,
> __arena_user? Can't we have a single defined semantics of how arena
> pointers are supposed to work?
>
> I can imagine something like follows:
> * arena pointers can not be null, check for nulls
> before passing from BPF prog to the kernel
We are deliberately lax when handling arena and don't do any kind of
value tracking there. So e.g. the following won't work:
if (foo->ptr) {
...
kfunc(foo->ptr);
}
Unless compiler decides to keep foo->ptr in a register. I'm not sure
whether enforcing non-null here from the verifier side is the right
call.
> * arena pointers are converted to the kernel space for
> kfunc/struct_ops callback by the verifier
>
> With the documented and enforced semantics like this one way of
> annotating and one annotation should be enough.
>
> What am I missing?
At the moment we have two consumers:
- Planned sched_ext related kfuncs that need kernel space pointers.
- Existing kfuncs with KF_ARENA_ARG:
- bpf_arena_alloc_pages
- bpf_arena_free_pages
- bpf_arena_reserve_pages
They, take a user space address. Looking at the code is appears that
all three can be changed to handle kernel space address.
On the other hand, neither of these *needs* the passed pointer to be
converted to a kernel side arena pointer. So that would be just some
useless work.
So there are two valid use cases.
...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-04 21:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-03 12:55 [PATCH dwarves] btf_encoder: Infer arena kfunc arguments from suffixes Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-04 18:43 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-08-04 19:27 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-04 20:22 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-04 21:19 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-08-04 21:34 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2026-08-04 21:46 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-04 21:51 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-04 21:57 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-04 22:57 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-08-04 23:17 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-08-04 21:55 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-08-04 22:05 ` Eduard Zingerman
2026-08-04 22:13 ` Ihor Solodrai
2026-08-04 21:36 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
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=4d20aecf677f4aec3e8e70106d4bdbcb01902e69.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alan.maguire@oracle.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=dwarves@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=tj@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