From: Kaitao Cheng <kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
To: ast@kernel.org, corbet@lwn.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com,
song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me,
haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org,
chengkaitao@kylinos.cn, skhan@linuxfoundation.org,
memxor@gmail.com
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, vmalik@redhat.com,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v11 6/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add to insert node after a given list node
Date: Thu, 21 May 2026 11:23:04 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260521032306.97118-7-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260521032306.97118-1-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev>
From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
Add a new kfunc bpf_list_add(head, new, prev, meta, off) that
inserts 'new' after 'prev' in the BPF linked list. Both must be in
the same list; 'prev' must already be in the list. The new node must
be an owning reference (e.g. from bpf_obj_new); the kfunc consumes
that reference and the node becomes non-owning once inserted.
We have added an additional parameter bpf_list_head *head to
bpf_list_add, as the verifier requires the head parameter to
check whether the lock is being held.
Returns 0 on success, -EINVAL if 'prev' is not in a list or 'new'
is already in a list (or duplicate insertion). On failure, the
kernel drops the passed-in node.
Signed-off-by: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
Reviewed-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 11 +++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 12 +++++++++---
2 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 1c69476c8a09..89579165ef4d 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2577,6 +2577,16 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_back_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
return bpf_list_push_back(head, node, meta__ign, off);
}
+__bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_add(struct bpf_list_head *head, struct bpf_list_node *new,
+ struct bpf_list_node *prev__nonown_allowed,
+ struct btf_struct_meta *meta, u64 off)
+{
+ struct bpf_list_node_kern *n = (void *)new, *p = (void *)prev__nonown_allowed;
+ struct list_head *prev_ptr = &p->list_head;
+
+ return __bpf_list_add(n, head, &prev_ptr, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
+}
+
static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
struct list_head *n)
{
@@ -4756,6 +4766,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_add, KF_IMPLICIT_ARGS)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_front, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_back, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_del, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 35eebb5e7769..662ad7312697 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -10959,6 +10959,7 @@ enum special_kfunc_type {
KF_bpf_list_push_front,
KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl,
KF_bpf_list_push_back,
+ KF_bpf_list_add,
KF_bpf_list_pop_front,
KF_bpf_list_pop_back,
KF_bpf_list_del,
@@ -11028,6 +11029,7 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_add)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_del)
@@ -11140,7 +11142,8 @@ static bool is_bpf_list_push_kfunc(u32 func_id)
return func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front] ||
func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front_impl] ||
func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back] ||
- func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl];
+ func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
+ func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_add];
}
static bool is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(u32 func_id)
@@ -19524,8 +19527,11 @@ int bpf_fixup_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
int struct_meta_reg = BPF_REG_3;
int node_offset_reg = BPF_REG_4;
- /* rbtree_add has extra 'less' arg, so args-to-fixup are in diff regs */
- if (is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(desc->func_id)) {
+ /* list_add/rbtree_add have an extra arg (prev/less),
+ * so args-to-fixup are in diff regs.
+ */
+ if (desc->func_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_add] ||
+ is_bpf_rbtree_add_kfunc(desc->func_id)) {
struct_meta_reg = BPF_REG_4;
node_offset_reg = BPF_REG_5;
}
--
2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-21 3:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-21 3:22 [PATCH bpf-next v11 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:22 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 1/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 2/8] bpf: clear list node owner and unlink before drop Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 4:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 3/8] bpf: allow non-owning list-node args via __nonown_allowed Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 4:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-21 6:29 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 4/8] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 4:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-21 6:59 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 5/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` Kaitao Cheng [this message]
2026-05-21 4:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 6/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add to insert node after a given list node bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-21 7:35 ` Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 7/8] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 3:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Kaitao Cheng
2026-05-21 4:08 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-05-21 10:00 ` [PATCH bpf-next v11 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs 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=20260521032306.97118-7-kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--to=kaitao.cheng@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-doc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=vmalik@redhat.com \
--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