From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Mike Rapoport <rppt@kernel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>,
Emil Tsalapatis <emil@etsalapatis.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/5] bpf, x86: make sure allocation in arch_bpf_trampoline_size() is writable
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 2026 22:44:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aoIhPvP8yM-3f60Y@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <an8r7EODLIL-bZM3@krava>
On Fri, Aug 14, 2026 at 04:53:32PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 10:51:38AM +0300, Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) wrote:
> > arch_bpf_trampoline_size() allocates a buffer to get actual size required
> > for a trampoline.
> >
> > This buffer must be in the module address space because
> > __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline() calculates rel32 offsets relatively to
> > that buffer.
> >
> > In preparation for enabling ROX mode for EXECMEM_BPF make sure that the
> > allocated memory is writable.
> >
> > Add bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw() wrapper for execmem_alloc_rw() and use it for > buffer allocation in arch_bpf_trampoline_size().
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Mike Rapoport (Microsoft) <rppt@kernel.org>
> > ---
> > arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 5 ++---
> > include/linux/filter.h | 1 +
> > kernel/bpf/core.c | 5 +++++
> > 3 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > index de7515ea1bea..b2feec81e231 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> > @@ -3703,13 +3703,12 @@ int arch_bpf_trampoline_size(const struct btf_func_model *m, u32 flags,
> > int ret;
> >
> > /* Allocate a temporary buffer for __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline().
> > - * This will NOT cause fragmentation in direct map, as we do not
> > - * call set_memory_*() on this buffer.
> > *
> > * We cannot use kvmalloc here, because we need image to be in
> > * module memory range.
> > + * Since it must be writable use bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw().
> > */
> > - image = bpf_jit_alloc_exec(PAGE_SIZE);
> > + image = bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw(PAGE_SIZE);
>
> hi,
> this change (this particular patch plus possibly others in this set) is
> causing tracing_multi attachment bench slowdown
>
> the benchmark allocates huge number of trampolines and I'm seeing extra
> arch_bpf_trampoline_size code paths in the attached perf profile
>
> I'm not that familiar with the allocator, but following hack makes the
> benchmark ok again:
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> index 6a94370a2448..bbff3c9c6681 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
> @@ -1130,7 +1130,7 @@ void *bpf_jit_alloc_exec(unsigned long size)
>
> void *bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw(unsigned long size)
> {
> - return execmem_alloc_rw(EXECMEM_BPF, size);
> + return execmem_alloc(EXECMEM_MODULE_DATA, size);
> }
>
> void bpf_jit_free_exec(void *addr)
>
>
> I still need to do more checks, but I'm wondering if we could actually fix
> this by not allocating image data in arch_bpf_trampoline_size at all..
> and just teach __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline to survive NULL image data
> and just return the size in such case
fyi doing ^^^ is not so straigh forward as I hoped for, but if we just allocate
dummy page at init and used that in arch_bpf_trampoline_size we get some speedup
I'll rebase that on top of your fix and send it out later
with your fix:
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: found 55077 functions
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: attached in 1.470s
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: detached in 0.249s
with change below:
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: found 55079 functions
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: attached in 0.754s
serial_test_tracing_multi_bench_attach: detached in 0.247s
thanks,
jirka
---
diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index 1a9fb530adc3..3e8ba33944c9 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <linux/if_vlan.h>
#include <linux/bitfield.h>
+#include <linux/init.h>
#include <linux/bpf.h>
#include <linux/bpf_verifier.h>
#include <linux/memory.h>
@@ -23,6 +24,19 @@
static bool all_callee_regs_used[4] = {true, true, true, true};
+/*
+ * Reuse a writable image in the BPF execmem range for size calculation.
+ * Its contents do not affect size calculation.
+ */
+static void *trampoline_size_image;
+
+static int __init init_trampoline_size_image(void)
+{
+ trampoline_size_image = bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw(PAGE_SIZE);
+ return trampoline_size_image ? 0 : -ENOMEM;
+}
+late_initcall(init_trampoline_size_image);
+
static u8 *emit_code(u8 *ptr, u32 bytes, unsigned int len)
{
if (len == 1)
@@ -3811,23 +3825,11 @@ int arch_bpf_trampoline_size(const struct btf_func_model *m, u32 flags,
struct bpf_tramp_nodes *tnodes, void *func_addr)
{
struct bpf_tramp_image im;
- void *image;
- int ret;
-
- /* Allocate a temporary buffer for __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline().
- *
- * We cannot use kvmalloc here, because we need image to be in
- * module memory range.
- * Since it must be writable use bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw().
- */
- image = bpf_jit_alloc_exec_rw(PAGE_SIZE);
- if (!image)
- return -ENOMEM;
- ret = __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(&im, image, image + PAGE_SIZE, image,
- m, flags, tnodes, func_addr);
- bpf_jit_free_exec(image);
- return ret;
+ return __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(&im, trampoline_size_image,
+ trampoline_size_image + PAGE_SIZE,
+ trampoline_size_image, m, flags,
+ tnodes, func_addr);
}
static int emit_bpf_dispatcher(u8 **pprog, int a, int b, s64 *progs, u8 *image, u8 *buf)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-16 20:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-16 7:51 [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/5] bpf, x86: enable EXECMEM_ROX_CACHE for BPF allocations Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-16 7:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/5] bpf: dispatcher: allocate bpf_dispatcher->rw_image with vzalloc() Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-16 8:52 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-07-16 9:27 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-16 9:49 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-07-16 7:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/5] bpf: drop __weak from bpf_jit_alloc_exec() and bpf_jit_free_exec() Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-16 7:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/5] bpf: alloc_prog_pack(): skip ROX management for already ROX memory Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-16 7:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/5] bpf, x86: make sure allocation in arch_bpf_trampoline_size() is writable Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-08-14 14:53 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-08-16 8:57 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-08-16 20:13 ` Jiri Olsa
2026-08-17 14:20 ` Daniel Borkmann
2026-08-16 20:44 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2026-07-16 7:51 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 5/5] x86/bpf: enable EXECMEM_ROX_CACHE for BPF allocations Mike Rapoport (Microsoft)
2026-07-17 0:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/5] bpf, x86: " Song Liu
2026-07-17 6:41 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-17 7:27 ` Song Liu
2026-07-17 9:29 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-17 17:50 ` Song Liu
2026-07-19 9:23 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-21 17:59 ` Song Liu
2026-07-22 8:05 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-22 15:04 ` Song Liu
2026-07-27 8:35 ` Mike Rapoport
2026-07-22 15:40 ` 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=aoIhPvP8yM-3f60Y@krava \
--to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=emil@etsalapatis.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=leon.hwang@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rppt@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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