From: Chengkaitao <pilgrimtao@gmail.com>
To: martin.lau@linux.dev, ast@kernel.org, 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,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v7 1/5] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc.
Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2026 21:46:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260308134614.29711-2-pilgrimtao@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260308134614.29711-1-pilgrimtao@gmail.com>
From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
If a user holds ownership of a node in the middle of a list, they
can directly remove it from the list without strictly adhering to
deletion rules from the head or tail.
We have added an additional parameter bpf_list_head *head to
bpf_list_del, as the verifier requires the head parameter to
check whether the lock is being held.
This is typically paired with bpf_refcount. After calling
bpf_list_del, it is generally necessary to drop the reference to
the list node twice to prevent reference count leaks.
Signed-off-by: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 30 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 6 +++++-
2 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 6eb6c82ed2ee..01b74c4ac00d 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2426,20 +2426,23 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_back_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
return __bpf_list_add(n, head, true, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
}
-static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head, bool tail)
+static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
+ struct list_head *n)
{
- struct list_head *n, *h = (void *)head;
+ struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
struct bpf_list_node_kern *node;
/* If list_head was 0-initialized by map, bpf_obj_init_field wasn't
* called on its fields, so init here
*/
- if (unlikely(!h->next))
+ if (unlikely(!h->next)) {
INIT_LIST_HEAD(h);
- if (list_empty(h))
+ return NULL;
+ }
+
+ if (n == h)
return NULL;
- n = tail ? h->prev : h->next;
node = container_of(n, struct bpf_list_node_kern, list_head);
if (WARN_ON_ONCE(READ_ONCE(node->owner) != head))
return NULL;
@@ -2451,12 +2454,24 @@ static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head, bool tai
__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_front(struct bpf_list_head *head)
{
- return __bpf_list_del(head, false);
+ struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
+
+ return __bpf_list_del(head, h->next);
}
__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
{
- return __bpf_list_del(head, true);
+ struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
+
+ return __bpf_list_del(head, h->prev);
+}
+
+__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
+ struct bpf_list_node *node)
+{
+ struct bpf_list_node_kern *kn = (void *)node;
+
+ return __bpf_list_del(head, &kn->list_head);
}
__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_front(struct bpf_list_head *head)
@@ -4545,6 +4560,7 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
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)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_front, KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_back, KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_task_acquire, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RCU | KF_RET_NULL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 67c09b43a497..c9557d3fb8dd 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -12461,6 +12461,7 @@ enum special_kfunc_type {
KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl,
KF_bpf_list_pop_front,
KF_bpf_list_pop_back,
+ KF_bpf_list_del,
KF_bpf_list_front,
KF_bpf_list_back,
KF_bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx,
@@ -12521,6 +12522,7 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_del)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx)
@@ -12996,6 +12998,7 @@ static bool is_bpf_list_api_kfunc(u32 btf_id)
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_front] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_back] ||
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_del] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_front] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_back];
}
@@ -13118,7 +13121,8 @@ static bool check_kfunc_is_graph_node_api(struct bpf_verifier_env *env,
switch (node_field_type) {
case BPF_LIST_NODE:
ret = (kfunc_btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front_impl] ||
- kfunc_btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl]);
+ kfunc_btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
+ kfunc_btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_del]);
break;
case BPF_RB_NODE:
ret = (kfunc_btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_rbtree_remove] ||
--
2.50.1 (Apple Git-155)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-08 13:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-08 13:46 [PATCH bpf-next v7 0/5] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Chengkaitao
2026-03-08 13:46 ` Chengkaitao [this message]
2026-03-09 6:33 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 1/5] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Leon Hwang
2026-03-10 20:10 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-10 20:28 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-08 13:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 2/5] bpf: Add bpf_list_add_impl to insert node after a given list node Chengkaitao
2026-03-08 14:25 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-09 6:34 ` Leon Hwang
2026-03-10 20:10 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-08 13:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 3/5] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Chengkaitao
2026-03-09 6:42 ` Leon Hwang
2026-03-08 13:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 4/5] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Chengkaitao
2026-03-08 14:25 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-09 6:43 ` Leon Hwang
2026-03-10 2:05 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-08 13:46 ` [PATCH bpf-next v7 5/5] bpf: refactor kfunc checks using table-driven approach in verifier Chengkaitao
2026-03-09 6:45 ` Leon Hwang
2026-03-10 20:10 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2026-03-11 5:36 ` Leon Hwang
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=20260308134614.29711-2-pilgrimtao@gmail.com \
--to=pilgrimtao@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chengkaitao@kylinos.cn \
--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-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--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