From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/3] bpf: remove unnecessary prune and jump points
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 17:28:51 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <638fec5317631_b86520813@john.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221206233345.438540-4-andrii@kernel.org>
Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Don't mark some instructions as jump points when there are actually no
> jumps and instructions are just processed sequentially. Such case is
> handled naturally by precision backtracking logic without the need to
> update jump history. See get_prev_insn_idx(). It goes back linearly by
> one instruction, unless current top of jmp_history is pointing to
> current instruction. In such case we use `st->jmp_history[cnt - 1].prev_idx`
> to find instruction from which we jumped to the current instruction
> non-linearly.
>
> Also remove both jump and prune point marking for instruction right
> after unconditional jumps, as program flow can get to the instruction
> right after unconditional jump instruction only if there is a jump to
> that instruction from somewhere else in the program. In such case we'll
> mark such instruction as prune/jump point because it's a destination of
> a jump.
>
> This change has no changes in terms of number of instructions or states
> processes across Cilium and selftests programs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> ---
Thanks.
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-07 1:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-06 23:33 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/3] Refactor verifier prune and jump point handling Andrii Nakryiko
2022-12-06 23:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/3] bpf: decouple prune and jump points Andrii Nakryiko
2022-12-06 23:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/3] bpf: mostly decouple jump history management from is_state_visited() Andrii Nakryiko
2022-12-06 23:33 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/3] bpf: remove unnecessary prune and jump points Andrii Nakryiko
2022-12-07 1:28 ` John Fastabend [this message]
2022-12-07 3:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-12-07 18:36 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-12-07 18:39 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-12-07 3:30 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/3] Refactor verifier prune and jump point handling patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=638fec5317631_b86520813@john.notmuch \
--to=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--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