From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
To: "Jose E. Marchesi" <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
david.faust@oracle.com, cupertino.miranda@oracle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: fix bpf_ksym_exists in GCC
Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2024 13:52:48 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c4d99195-f000-47f2-b167-12e76b705dc9@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240428112559.10518-1-jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
On 4/28/24 4:25 AM, Jose E. Marchesi wrote:
> The macro bpf_ksym_exists is defined in bpf_helpers.h as:
>
> #define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) ({ \
> _Static_assert(!__builtin_constant_p(!!sym), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \
> !!sym; \
> })
>
> The purpose of the macro is to determine whether a given symbol has
> been defined, given the address of the object associated with the
> symbol. It also has a compile-time check to make sure the object
> whose address is passed to the macro has been declared as weak, which
> makes the check on `sym' meaningful.
>
> As it happens, the check for weak doesn't work in GCC in all cases,
> because __builtin_constant_p not always folds at parse time when
> optimizing. This is because optimizations that happen later in the
> compilation process, like inlining, may make a previously non-constant
> expression a constant. This results in errors like the following when
> building the selftests with GCC:
>
> bpf_helpers.h:190:24: error: expression in static assertion is not constant
> 190 | _Static_assert(!__builtin_constant_p(!!sym), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> Fortunately recent versions of GCC support a __builtin_has_attribute
> that can be used to directly check for the __weak__ attribute. This
> patch changes bpf_helpers.h to use that builtin when building with a
> recent enough GCC, and to omit the check if GCC is too old to support
> the builtin.
>
> The macro used for GCC becomes:
>
> #define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) ({ \
> _Static_assert(__builtin_has_attribute (*sym, __weak__), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \
> !!sym; \
> })
>
> Note that since bpf_ksym_exists is designed to get the address of the
> object associated with symbol SYM, we pass *sym to
> __builtin_has_attribute instead of sym. When an expression is passed
> to __builtin_has_attribute then it is the type of the passed
> expression that is checked for the specified attribute. The
> expression itself is not evaluated. This accommodates well with the
> existing usages of the macro:
>
> - For function objects:
>
> struct task_struct *bpf_task_acquire(struct task_struct *p) __ksym __weak;
> [...]
> bpf_ksym_exists(bpf_task_acquire)
>
> - For variable objects:
>
> extern const struct rq runqueues __ksym __weak; /* typed */
> [...]
> bpf_ksym_exists(&runqueues)
>
> Note also that BPF support was added in GCC 10 and support for
> __builtin_has_attribute in GCC 9.
It would be great if you can share details with asm code and
BTF so we can understand better. I am not 100% sure about
whether __builtin_has_attribute builtin can help to do
run-time ksym resolution with libbpf.
The following is what clang does:
For example, for progs/test_ksyms_weak.c, we have
43 if (rq && bpf_ksym_exists(&runqueues))
44 out__existing_typed = rq->cpu;
...
56 if (!bpf_ksym_exists(bpf_task_acquire))
57 /* dead code won't be seen by the verifier */
58 bpf_task_acquire(0);
The asm code:
.loc 0 42 20 prologue_end # progs/test_ksyms_weak.c:42:20
.Ltmp0:
r6 = runqueues ll
r1 = runqueues ll
w2 = 0
call 153
.Ltmp1:
.Ltmp2:
#DEBUG_VALUE: pass_handler:rq <- $r0
.loc 0 43 9 # progs/test_ksyms_weak.c:43:9
.Ltmp3:
if r0 == 0 goto LBB0_3
.Ltmp4:
.Ltmp5:
# %bb.1: # %entry
#DEBUG_VALUE: pass_handler:rq <- $r0
if r6 == 0 goto LBB0_3
...
LBB0_5: # %if.end4
.loc 0 56 6 is_stmt 1 # progs/test_ksyms_weak.c:56:6
.Ltmp25:
r1 = bpf_task_acquire ll
if r1 != 0 goto LBB0_7
# %bb.6: # %if.then9
Here, 'runqueues' and 'bpf_task_acquire' will be changed by libbpf
based on the *current* kernel state. The BTF datasec encodes such ksym
information like below which will be used by libbpf:
.long 13079 # BTF_KIND_DATASEC(id = 395)
.long 251658247 # 0xf000007
.long 0
.long 377
.long bpf_task_acquire
.long 0
.long 379
.long bpf_testmod_test_mod_kfunc
.long 0
.long 381
.long invalid_kfunc
.long 0
.long 387
.long runqueues
.long 3264
.long 388
.long bpf_prog_active
.long 1
.long 389
.long bpf_link_fops1
.long 1
.long 391
.long bpf_link_fops2
.long 4
What gcc generates for the above example? It would be great
if this can be put in the commit message.
>
> Locally tested in bpf-next master branch.
> No regressions.
>
> Signed-of-by: Jose E. Marchesi <jose.marchesi@oracle.com>
> Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
> Cc: david.faust@oracle.com
> Cc: cupertino.miranda@oracle.com
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 9 +++++++++
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
> index 62e1c0cc4a59..a720636a87d9 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
> @@ -186,10 +186,19 @@ enum libbpf_tristate {
> #define __kptr __attribute__((btf_type_tag("kptr")))
> #define __percpu_kptr __attribute__((btf_type_tag("percpu_kptr")))
>
> +#if defined (__clang__)
> #define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) ({ \
> _Static_assert(!__builtin_constant_p(!!sym), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \
> !!sym; \
> })
> +#elif __GNUC__ > 8
| +#define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) ({ \
> + _Static_assert(__builtin_has_attribute (*sym, __weak__), #sym " should be marked as __weak"); \
> + !!sym; \
> +})
> +#else
> +#define bpf_ksym_exists(sym) !!sym
> +#endif
>
> #define __arg_ctx __attribute__((btf_decl_tag("arg:ctx")))
> #define __arg_nonnull __attribute((btf_decl_tag("arg:nonnull")))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-04-29 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-04-28 11:25 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: fix bpf_ksym_exists in GCC Jose E. Marchesi
2024-04-29 20:52 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2024-05-02 17:44 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-05-03 4:56 ` Yonghong Song
2024-05-02 18:23 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-05-03 4:58 ` Yonghong Song
2024-05-03 5:52 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-03 7:50 ` Jose E. Marchesi
2024-05-03 6:00 ` 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=c4d99195-f000-47f2-b167-12e76b705dc9@linux.dev \
--to=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=cupertino.miranda@oracle.com \
--cc=david.faust@oracle.com \
--cc=jose.marchesi@oracle.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