From: Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
martin.lau@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: fix offsetof() and container_of() to work with CO-RE
Date: Wed, 10 May 2023 07:43:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <dae5805d-d240-7219-6e96-96922fda361a@meta.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4Bzampv=wkcdJct2BR3VmAPZvx8_S7RJ_3dbzVo0H2U+Mpw@mail.gmail.com>
On 5/9/23 7:59 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Tue, May 9, 2023 at 6:33 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@meta.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/8/23 11:55 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
>>> It seems like __builtin_offset() doesn't preserve CO-RE field
>>> relocations properly. So if offsetof() macro is defined through
>>> __builtin_offset(), CO-RE-enabled BPF code using container_of() will be
>>> subtly and silently broken.
>>
>> This is true. See 63fe3fd393dc("libbpf: Do not use __builtin_offsetof
>> for offsetof"). At some point, we used __builtin_offset() and found
>> CO-RE relocation won't work, so the above commit switched back to
>> use ((unsigned long)&((TYPE *)0)->MEMBER).
>>
>>>
>>> To avoid this problem, redefine offsetof() and container_of() in the
>>> form that works with CO-RE relocations more reliably.
>>
>> I am okay with the change to forcefully define offsetof() and
>> container_of() since this is critical for correct CO-RE
>> relocations.
>>
>>>
>>> Fixes: 5fbc220862fc ("tools/libpf: Add offsetof/container_of macro in bpf_helpers.h")
>>> Reported-by: Lennart Poettering <lennart@poettering.net>
>>> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
>>
>> Ack with a nit below.
>>
>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
>>
>>> ---
>>> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 15 ++++++++++-----
>>> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
>>> index 929a3baca8ef..bbab9ad9dc5a 100644
>>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
>>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
>>> @@ -77,16 +77,21 @@
>>> /*
>>> * Helper macros to manipulate data structures
>>> */
>>> -#ifndef offsetof
>>> -#define offsetof(TYPE, MEMBER) ((unsigned long)&((TYPE *)0)->MEMBER)
>>> -#endif
>>> -#ifndef container_of
>>> +
>>> +/* offsetof() definition that uses __builtin_offset() might not preserve field
>>> + * offset CO-RE relocation properly, so force-redefine offsetof() using
>>> + * old-school approach which works with CO-RE correctly
>>> + */
>>> +#undef offsetof
>>
>> I am not sure whether the above 'undef' is good or bad. In my opinion,
>> I would just remove the above 'undef'. If user defines
>> offset as __builtin_offset, the compiler will issue a warning
>> and user should remove that macro or undef them.
>
> If we don't #undef, we are almost guaranteed to get a compilation
> warning. See [0], where I repro this problem based on Lennart's
> original code.
>
> [0] https://github.com/anakryiko/libbpf-bootstrap/commit/2bad3e7f48e4e4eea1a083620f21eba59aa75b1a
>
Okay, I see. They didn't use vmlinux.h...
>>
>> Otherwise, user may get impression that their __builtin_offset
>> is working but actually it is not. the same for container_of.
>
> Can we just fix __builtin_offset() to generate/preserve field offset
> CO-RE relocation?
I checked with llvm17 source code. The __builtin_offset() is handled
in two places:
- clang/lib/Sema/SemaExpr.cpp: func BuildBuiltinOffsetOf
- clang/lib/CodeGen/CGExprScalar.cpp: func VisitOffsetOfExpr
As expected, the above two functions process __builtin_offset()
without any arch specific handling.
I guess we could try to add CO-RE relocation to them but not
sure whether upstream likes it or not.
But the same issue exists in earlier clang versions.
So I am okay with the current patch with
"#undef offsetof" and "#undef container_of" although
clang headers does not have macro for "container_of".
>
>>
>>> +#define offsetof(type, member) ((unsigned long)&((type *)0)->member)
>>> +
>>> +/* redefined container_of() to ensure we use the above offsetof() macro */
>>> +#undef container_of
>>> #define container_of(ptr, type, member) \
>>> ({ \
>>> void *__mptr = (void *)(ptr); \
>>> ((type *)(__mptr - offsetof(type, member))); \
>>> })
>>> -#endif
>>>
>>> /*
>>> * Compiler (optimization) barrier.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-05-10 14:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-09 6:55 [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: fix offsetof() and container_of() to work with CO-RE Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-09 13:32 ` Yonghong Song
2023-05-09 14:59 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-05-10 14:43 ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2023-05-12 19:10 ` 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=dae5805d-d240-7219-6e96-96922fda361a@meta.com \
--to=yhs@meta.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=lennart@poettering.net \
--cc=martin.lau@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