From: Chenguang Zhao <chenguang.zhao@linux.dev>
To: chenhuacai@kernel.org, kernel@xen0n.name, ast@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, yangtiezhu@loongson.cn
Cc: hengqi.chen@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, loongarch@lists.linux.dev,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
chenguang.zhao@linux.dev,
Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
Subject: [PATCH v4 0/4] LoongArch bpf kptr xchg inline support
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 10:28:33 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260729022837.355549-1-chenguang.zhao@linux.dev> (raw)
From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
This series enables the BPF verifier to inline bpf_kptr_xchg()
into BPF_XCHG on LoongArch64, and fixes the underlying JIT
atomic ordering that makes such inlining safe.
The BPF verifier can lower bpf_kptr_xchg() to a single BPF_XCHG
atomic when the JIT advertises ptr xchg support via
bpf_jit_supports_ptr_xchg(). This removes helper-call overhead
from the kptr exchange fast path. Inlining is only correct when
the JITed exchange provides the same sequentially consistent
ordering as the bpf_kptr_xchg() helper.
Patch 1 fixes memory ordering for all value-returning BPF atomic
RMW operations emitted by the LoongArch bpf JIT. Per LKMM,
value-returning atomic RMW must provide sequentially consistent
ordering. Plain AMO instructions and bare ll/sc loops on LoongArch
do not satisfy this by themselves:
- BPF_FETCH (ADD/AND/OR/XOR): switch to am*_db.{b,h,w,d}
- BPF_XCHG: switch to amswap_db.{b,h,w,d}
- BPF_CMPXCHG: emit dbar 0x700 after the ll/sc loop, matching
__WEAK_LLSC_MB in cmpxchg.h
Non-value-returning RMW ops (plain BPF_ADD, BPF_AND, etc.)
remain weakly ordered, consistent with LKMM. This fix is independent
of kptr inlining and benefits all BPF programs using value-returning
atomics on LoongArch.
Patch 2 implements bpf_jit_supports_ptr_xchg() so the verifier
may inline bpf_kptr_xchg() on LoongArch64.
Patches 3 and 4 extend bpf selftests: functional coverage via
kptr_xchg_inline, and an optional kptr-xchg benchmark to compare
helper vs inlined paths.
Chenguang Zhao (4):
LoongArch: bpf: Fix memory ordering for value-returning atomics
LoongArch: bpf: Advertise JIT support for kptr xchg inline
selftests/bpf: Enable kptr_xchg_inline test on LoongArch
selftests/bpf: Add kptr-xchg benchmark
arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h | 18 ++++
arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c | 37 ++++---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 2 +
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c | 2 +
.../selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++
.../bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c | 3 +-
.../selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c | 49 ++++++++++
7 files changed, 192 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c
---
v4:
- Resend patches against new kernel.
v3:
- https://lore.kernel.org/all/1782119051687451.15056.seg@mailgw.kylinos.cn/
v2:
- https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260603100438.2177817-1-zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn/
v1:
- https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260602021515.214560-1-zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn/
--
2.25.1
next reply other threads:[~2026-07-29 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-29 2:28 Chenguang Zhao [this message]
2026-07-29 2:28 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] LoongArch: bpf: Fix memory ordering for value-returning atomics Chenguang Zhao
2026-07-29 2:28 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] LoongArch: bpf: Advertise JIT support for kptr xchg inline Chenguang Zhao
2026-07-29 2:28 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] selftests/bpf: Enable kptr_xchg_inline test on LoongArch Chenguang Zhao
2026-07-29 2:28 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add kptr-xchg benchmark Chenguang Zhao
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=20260729022837.355549-1-chenguang.zhao@linux.dev \
--to=chenguang.zhao@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=chenhuacai@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=hengqi.chen@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel@xen0n.name \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=loongarch@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
--cc=zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn \
/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