From: "Morten Brørup" <mb@smartsharesystems.com>
To: "Marat Khalili" <marat.khalili@huawei.com>,
"Christophe Fontaine" <cfontain@redhat.com>, <dev@dpdk.org>
Cc: "Konstantin Ananyev" <konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com>,
"Wathsala Vithanage" <wathsala.vithanage@arm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] bpf/arm64: support packet data load instructions
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 14:39:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35F657A0@smartserver.smartshare.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4942136acefe4fc3b5157191749fe3d5@huawei.com>
> From: Marat Khalili [mailto:marat.khalili@huawei.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 18 March 2026 14.07
>
> > > Handling immediate as unsigned is questionable, especially in the
> > > BPF_IND case
> > > it may produce incorrect results.
> >
> > In Classic BPF (cBPF), when the immediate "k" is negative (when cast
> to signed integer), it is used
> > for getting packet metadata (e.g. SKF_AD_VLAN_TAG gets the VLAN ID);
> otherwise it is considered
> > unsigned.
>
> Yes. Since we don't support it, we should probably consider these
> offsets invalid.
+1
>
> And in the BPF_IND case one might be tempted to load end of some packet
> area in
> the register and use negative offsets, we probably should handle it
> correctly.
In Classic BPF, negative "k" has special meaning for both BPF_ABS and BPF_IND.
So we should consider it invalid for both cases.
That prevents applications from using it the way you describe.
And it will allow us to add BPF library support for Linux-compatible special meanings later, without breaking the ABI.
>
> > > To make things worse, `__rte_pktmbuf_read` is also buggy when
> passed
> > > very large
> > > lengths (again, technically not ARM eBPF fault).
> >
> > Are you referring to the potential integer wraparound in the off+len
> > rte_pktmbuf_pkt_len(m)
> > comparison?
> > [BZ1724]
> > Or some other bug in __rte_pktmbuf_read()?
> >
> > [BZ1724]: https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1724
>
> Technically that one manifested itself in rte_pktmbuf_read (without
> underscores), but essentially the root cause is the same. In the eBPF
> BPF_ABS
> case we could potentially rely on `__rte_pktmbuf_read` for refusing to
> accept
> negative values converted to large integers, but due to overflows we
> cannot.
Agree.
The off+len wraparound in rte_pktmbuf_read() and __rte_pktmbuf_read() is clearly a bug, and not intentional.
Reading the function documentation supports the conclusion that the wraparound is a bug; the off and len parameters are unsigned, and the documentation says nothing about an ability to make them behave as signed.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-18 13:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-10 12:20 [PATCH] bpf/arm64: support packet data load instructions Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-17 9:07 ` David Marchand
2026-03-18 11:59 ` Marat Khalili
2026-03-18 12:54 ` Morten Brørup
2026-03-18 13:07 ` Marat Khalili
2026-03-18 13:39 ` Morten Brørup [this message]
2026-03-18 15:34 ` Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-18 16:16 ` Marat Khalili
2026-03-18 16:37 ` Morten Brørup
2026-03-18 16:43 ` Marat Khalili
2026-03-18 18:10 ` Konstantin Ananyev
2026-03-19 9:20 ` Morten Brørup
2026-03-18 23:13 ` Stephen Hemminger
2026-03-19 11:44 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-19 11:44 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] bpf/arm64: fix offset type to allow a negative jump Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-19 11:44 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] bpf/arm64: support packet data load instructions Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-23 8:15 ` Christophe Fontaine
2026-03-23 9:26 ` Marat Khalili
2026-04-09 22:11 ` Wathsala Vithanage
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=98CBD80474FA8B44BF855DF32C47DC35F657A0@smartserver.smartshare.dk \
--to=mb@smartsharesystems.com \
--cc=cfontain@redhat.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=konstantin.ananyev@huawei.com \
--cc=marat.khalili@huawei.com \
--cc=wathsala.vithanage@arm.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