From: Madhavan Srinivasan <maddy@linux.ibm.com>
To: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>,
Saket Kumar Bhaskar <skb99@linux.ibm.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
shuah@kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
stable@vger.kernel.org, venkat88@linux.ibm.com,
yeswanth@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] powerpc/bpf: address missing verifier selftest coverage
Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2026 08:51:02 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <fe4fa7c2-db08-471f-b23d-cb34f38fc947@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7ffaff94-b1b1-4420-8c19-c88bf49139a6@linux.ibm.com>
On 8/6/26 11:04 PM, Hari Bathini wrote:
>
>
> On 05/08/26 11:36 am, Saket Kumar Bhaskar wrote:
>> From: Abhishek Dubey <adubey@linux.ibm.com>
>>
>> The verifier selftest validates JITed instructions by matching expected
>> disassembly output. The first two patches fix issues in powerpc
>> instruction
>> disassembly that were causing test flow failures. The fix is common for
>> 64-bit & 32-bit powerpc. Add support for the powerpc-specific
>> "__powerpc64"
>> architecture tag in the third patch, enabling proper test filtering in
>> verifier test files. Introduce verifier testcases for tailcalls on
>> powerpc64.
>>
>> The first patch in series is fix patch, correcting memory alignment with
>> 8-byte boundary for long branch address field. The subsequent patches
>> enables verifier selftests on powerpc. The fifth patch in the series
>> fixes
>> incorrect comparator usage for comparing tailcall info with tailcall
>> threshold. The last two patches fix JIT buffer overflow for large BPF
>> progs
>> and private stack memory leak (identified by bot during reviews).
>>
>> Issue Details:
>> --------------
>>
>> The Long branch stub in the trampoline implementation[1] provides
>> flexibility to handles short as well as long branch distance to
>> actual trampoline. Whereas, the 8 bytes long dummy_tramp_addr field
>> sitting before long branch stub leads to failure when enabling
>> verifier based seltest for ppc64.
>> The verifier selftests require disassembing the final jited
>> image
>> to get native instructions. Later the disassembled instruction
>> sequence is matched against sequence of instructions provided in
>> test-file under __jited() wrapper. The final jited image contains
>> Out-of-line stub and Long branch stub as part of epilogue jitting
>> for a bpf program. The 8 bytes space for dummy_tramp is sandwiched
>> between both above mentioned stubs. These 8 bytes contain memory
>> address of dummy trampoline during trampoline invocation which
>> don't
>> correspond to any powerpc instructions. So, disassembly fails
>> resulting in failure of verifier selftests.
>> The following code snippet shows the problem with current
>> arrangement
>> made for dummy_tramp_addr.
>> /* Out-of-line stub */
>> mflr r0
>> [b|bl] tramp
>> mtlr r0 //only with OOL
>> b bpf_func + 4
>> /* Long branch stub */
>> .long <dummy_tramp_addr> <---Invalid bytes sequence,
>> disassembly fails
>> mflr r11
>> bcl 20,31,$+4
>> mflr r12
>> ld r12, -8-SZL(r12)
>> mtctr r12
>> mtlr r11 //retain ftrace ABI
>> bctr
>>
>> Consider test program binary of size 112 bytes:
>> 0: 00000060 10004de8 00002039 f8ff21f9 81ff21f8 7000e1fb 3000e13b
>> 28: 3000e13b 2a006038 f8ff7ff8 00000039 7000e1eb 80002138 7843037d
>> 56: 2000804e a602087c 00000060 a603087c bcffff4b c0341d00 000000c0
>> 84: a602687d 05009f42 a602887d f0ff8ce9 a603897d a603687d 2004804e
>>
>> Disassembly output of above binary for ppc64le:
>> pc:0 left:112 00 00 00 60 : nop
>> pc:4 left:108 10 00 4d e8 : ld 2, 16(13)
>> pc:8 left:104 00 00 20 39 : li 9, 0
>> pc:12 left:100 f8 ff 21 f9 : std 9, -8(1)
>> pc:16 left:96 81 ff 21 f8 : stdu 1, -128(1)
>> pc:20 left:92 70 00 e1 fb : std 31, 112(1)
>> pc:24 left:88 30 00 e1 3b : addi 31, 1, 48
>> pc:28 left:84 30 00 e1 3b : addi 31, 1, 48
>> pc:32 left:80 2a 00 60 38 : li 3, 42
>> pc:36 left:76 f8 ff 7f f8 : std 3, -8(31)
>> pc:40 left:72 00 00 00 39 : li 8, 0
>> pc:44 left:68 70 00 e1 eb : ld 31, 112(1)
>> pc:48 left:64 80 00 21 38 : addi 1, 1, 128
>> pc:52 left:60 78 43 03 7d : mr 3, 8
>> pc:56 left:56 20 00 80 4e : blr
>> pc:60 left:52 a6 02 08 7c : mflr 0
>> pc:64 left:48 00 00 00 60 : nop
>> pc:68 left:44 a6 03 08 7c : mtlr 0
>> pc:72 left:40 bc ff ff 4b : b .-68
>> pc:76 left:36 c0 34 1d 00 :
>> ...
>>
>> Failure log:
>> Can't disasm instruction at offset 76: c0 34 1d 00 00 00 00 c0
>> a6 02 68 7d 05 00 9f 42
>> --------------------------------------
>>
>> Observation:
>> Can't disasm instruction at offset 76 as this address has
>> ".long <dummy_tramp_addr>" (0xc0341d00000000c0)
>> But valid instructions follow at offset 84 onwards.
>>
>> Move the long branch address space to the bottom of the long
>> branch stub. This allows uninterrupted disassembly until the
>> last 8 bytes. Exclude these last bytes from the overall
>> program length to prevent failure in assembly generation.
>>
>> Following is disassembler output for same test program with
>> moved down
>> dummy_tramp_addr field:
>> .....
>> .....
>> pc:68 left:44 a6 03 08 7c : mtlr 0
>> pc:72 left:40 bc ff ff 4b : b .-68
>> pc:76 left:36 a6 02 68 7d : mflr 11
>> pc:80 left:32 05 00 9f 42 : bcl 20, 31, .+4
>> pc:84 left:28 a6 02 88 7d : mflr 12
>> pc:88 left:24 14 00 8c e9 : ld 12, 20(12)
>> pc:92 left:20 a6 03 89 7d : mtctr 12
>> pc:96 left:16 a6 03 68 7d : mtlr 11
>> pc:100 left:12 20 04 80 4e : bctr
>> pc:104 left:8 c0 34 1d 00 :
>>
>> Failure log:
>> Can't disasm instruction at offset 104: c0 34 1d 00 00 00 00 c0
>> ---------------------------------------
>> Disassembly logic can truncate at 104, ignoring last 8 bytes.
>>
>> Update the dummy_tramp_addr field offset calculation from the end
>> of the program to reflect its new location, for
>> bpf_arch_text_poke()
>> to update the actual trampoline's address in this field.
>>
>> [1]
>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241030070850.1361304-18-hbathini@linux.ibm.com
>>
>> v9->v10:
>> Modified expected JIT instruction in selftest for
>> CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PCREL incase of PPC_LI64 instruction.
>> Fix for stale entries in exception table
>> Update ARCH_POWERPC64 enum value to 0x40 to resolve rebase
>> conflict with ARCH_LOONGARCH (0x20).
>>
>> v8->v9:
>> Dynamic pass handling until code keeps shrinking
>> Fix private stack memory leak
>>
>> v7->v8:
>> Fixed bot identified issues of alt_exit_addr and BPF_EXIT
>> Fixed 32-bit ppc function signature mismatch
>>
>> v6->v7:
>> Fixed JIT buffer overflow in case of large BPF progs
>> Addressed remaining bot comments
>>
>> v5->v6:
>> Changed alignment NOP emittion dependency on fimage layout
>> Adjust tail truncate length for 32-bit ppc
>> Addressed few minor bot comments
>>
>> v4->v5:
>> Handled alignment NOP emit logic and corresponding stub offsets
>> Handled image buffer overflow problem in last pass
>> Above changes took care of other bot reviews
>> Included LLVMDisposeMessage() for graceful freeing
>> Adjusted parameters in bpf_jit_build_fentry_stubs for ppc32
>> Adjusted expected JIT inst. in tailcall test for
>> CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PCREL config
>> Added fix patch at last for inaccurate use of cmplwi inst.
>>
>> v3->v4:
>> Changed logic for emitting alignment NOP
>>
>> v2->v3:
>> Removed fixed NOP from bottom of long branch stub
>> Rebased on top of bpf-next
>>
>> v1->v2:
>> Added fix-patch to correct memory alignment in-place
>> Moved the optional alignmnet NOP before OOL stub
>>
>> [v1]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260225013627.22098-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v2]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260403004011.44417-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v3]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260411221413.44304-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v4]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260517214043.12975-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v5]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260519233812.18787-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v6]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260529015855.364704-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v7]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260611153826.31187-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v8]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260616164741.32252-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
>> [v9]:
>> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260623231411.6216-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com/
>>
>> Abhishek Dubey (8):
>> powerpc/bpf: fix alignment of long branch trampoline addres to t
>> powerpc/bpf: Move out dummy_tramp_addr after Long branch stub
>> selftest/bpf: Fixing powerpc JIT disassembly failure
>> selftest/bpf: Enable verifier selftest for powerpc64
>> powerpc64/bpf: fix compare instruction emitted for tailcall
>> selftest/bpf: Add tailcall verifier selftest for powerpc64
>> powerpc/bpf: fix buffer overflow in JIT for large BPF programs
>> powerpc64/bpf: fix percpu private stack leak on JIT failure
>>
>> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit.h | 20 +++-
>> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 102 +++++++++++++-----
>> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 7 +-
>> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 15 +--
>> .../selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c | 25 ++++-
>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h | 1 +
>> .../bpf/progs/verifier_tailcall_jit.c | 74 +++++++++++++
>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c | 5 +
>> 8 files changed, 209 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>>
>
> Alexei, Maddy,
>
> Given this has changes in common code too, should this go via bpf tree?
> If yes, @Saket can you post the next revision with bpf tag to make
> it explicit...
If I get an ack from Alexei, I can take this via ppc tree.
Maddy
>
> - Hari
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-07 3:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 6:06 [PATCH v10 0/8] powerpc/bpf: address missing verifier selftest coverage Saket Kumar Bhaskar
2026-08-06 17:34 ` Hari Bathini
2026-08-07 3:21 ` Madhavan Srinivasan [this message]
2026-08-07 11:47 ` Saket Kumar Bhaskar
2026-08-07 11:42 ` [PATCH v11 " Saket Kumar Bhaskar
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=fe4fa7c2-db08-471f-b23d-cb34f38fc947@linux.ibm.com \
--to=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skb99@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=venkat88@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=yeswanth@linux.ibm.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