[PATCH v4 0/4] LoongArch bpf kptr xchg inline support

[PATCH v4 0/4] LoongArch bpf kptr xchg inline support

[Chenguang Zhao]

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

[PATCH v4 1/4] LoongArch: bpf: Fix memory ordering for value-returning atomics

[Chenguang Zhao]

From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>

Per the Linux Kernel Memory Model, value-returning atomic RMW operations
must provide sequentially consistent ordering (a full memory barrier). On
LoongArch, plain AMO instructions and bare ll/sc loops do not satisfy this
requirement by themselves.

Update emit_atomic_rmw() to emit barrier-carrying instructions for all
value-returning BPF atomics:

 - BPF_FETCH (ADD/AND/OR/XOR): use am*_db.{b,h,w,d}
 - BPF_XCHG: use amswap_db.{b,h,w,d}
 - BPF_CMPXCHG: emit dbar 0x700 after the ll/sc loop, matching
   __WEAK_LLSC_MB in cmpxchg.h

Add the corresponding instruction encodings and emit helpers to inst.h.
Non-value-returning RMW ops (plain BPF_ADD, BPF_AND, etc.) are left as
weakly ordered, consistent with LKMM.

Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
---
 arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h | 18 +++++++++++++++++
 arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c      | 32 +++++++++++++++++--------------
 2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
index 76b723590023..bdbc17d07110 100644
--- a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
+++ b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
@@ -199,6 +199,10 @@ enum reg3_op {
 	amswaph_op	= 0x70b9,
 	amaddb_op	= 0x70ba,
 	amaddh_op	= 0x70bb,
+	amswapdbb_op	= 0x70bc,
+	amswapdbh_op	= 0x70bd,
+	amadddbb_op	= 0x70be,
+	amadddbh_op	= 0x70bf,
 	amswapw_op	= 0x70c0,
 	amswapd_op	= 0x70c1,
 	amaddw_op	= 0x70c2,
@@ -783,6 +787,20 @@ DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapb, amswapb_op)
 DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswaph, amswaph_op)
 DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapw, amswapw_op)
 DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapd, amswapd_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbb, amswapdbb_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbh, amswapdbh_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbb, amadddbb_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbh, amadddbh_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbw, amadddbw_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbd, amadddbd_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amanddbw, amanddbw_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amanddbd, amanddbd_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amordbw, amordbw_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amordbd, amordbd_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amxordbw, amxordbw_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amxordbd, amxordbd_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbw, amswapdbw_op)
+DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbd, amswapdbd_op)
 
 #define DEF_EMIT_REG3SA2_FORMAT(NAME, OP)				\
 static inline void emit_##NAME(union loongarch_instruction *insn,	\
diff --git a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
index 29c281bef28e..5417a5624327 100644
--- a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
+++ b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
@@ -8,6 +8,9 @@
 #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
 #include "bpf_jit.h"
 
+/* dbar hint for ll/sc completion ordering, see __WEAK_LLSC_MB */
+#define DBAR_LLSC_MB	0x700
+
 #define LOONGARCH_MAX_REG_ARGS 8
 
 #define LOONGARCH_SAVE_RA_NINSNS   1
@@ -433,7 +436,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 				pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amadd.b instruction is not supported\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
-			emit_insn(ctx, amaddb, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amadddbb, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_H:
@@ -441,39 +444,39 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 				pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amadd.h instruction is not supported\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
-			emit_insn(ctx, amaddh, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amadddbh, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_W:
-			emit_insn(ctx, amaddw, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amadddbw, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_DW:
-			emit_insn(ctx, amaddd, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amadddbd, src, t1, t3);
 			break;
 		}
 		break;
 	case BPF_AND | BPF_FETCH:
 		if (isdw) {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amandd, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amanddbd, src, t1, t3);
 		} else {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amandw, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amanddbw, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 		}
 		break;
 	case BPF_OR | BPF_FETCH:
 		if (isdw) {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amord, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amordbd, src, t1, t3);
 		} else {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amorw, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amordbw, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 		}
 		break;
 	case BPF_XOR | BPF_FETCH:
 		if (isdw) {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amxord, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amxordbd, src, t1, t3);
 		} else {
-			emit_insn(ctx, amxorw, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amxordbw, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 		}
 		break;
@@ -485,7 +488,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 				pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amswap.b instruction is not supported\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
-			emit_insn(ctx, amswapb, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbb, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_H:
@@ -493,15 +496,15 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 				pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amswap.h instruction is not supported\n");
 				return -EINVAL;
 			}
-			emit_insn(ctx, amswaph, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbh, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_W:
-			emit_insn(ctx, amswapw, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbw, src, t1, t3);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
 			break;
 		case BPF_DW:
-			emit_insn(ctx, amswapd, src, t1, t3);
+			emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbd, src, t1, t3);
 			break;
 		}
 		break;
@@ -524,6 +527,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
 			emit_insn(ctx, beq, t3, LOONGARCH_GPR_ZERO, -6);
 			emit_zext_32(ctx, r0, true);
 		}
+		emit_insn(ctx, dbar, DBAR_LLSC_MB);
 		break;
 	default:
 		pr_err_once("bpf-jit: invalid atomic read-modify-write opcode %02x\n", imm);
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v4 1/4] LoongArch: bpf: Fix memory ordering for value-returning atomics

[Hengqi Chen]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 10:29 AM Chenguang Zhao
<chenguang.zhao@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
>
> Per the Linux Kernel Memory Model, value-returning atomic RMW operations
> must provide sequentially consistent ordering (a full memory barrier). On
> LoongArch, plain AMO instructions and bare ll/sc loops do not satisfy this
> requirement by themselves.
>

The subject line could be:
  LoongArch: bpf: Align value-returning atomics with LKMM ordering

I think it's not a fix and we don't need a Fixes tag.

Other than that,
Acked-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>

> Update emit_atomic_rmw() to emit barrier-carrying instructions for all
> value-returning BPF atomics:
>
>  - BPF_FETCH (ADD/AND/OR/XOR): use am*_db.{b,h,w,d}
>  - BPF_XCHG: use amswap_db.{b,h,w,d}
>  - BPF_CMPXCHG: emit dbar 0x700 after the ll/sc loop, matching
>    __WEAK_LLSC_MB in cmpxchg.h
>
> Add the corresponding instruction encodings and emit helpers to inst.h.
> Non-value-returning RMW ops (plain BPF_ADD, BPF_AND, etc.) are left as
> weakly ordered, consistent with LKMM.
>
> Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>  arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h | 18 +++++++++++++++++
>  arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c      | 32 +++++++++++++++++--------------
>  2 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
> index 76b723590023..bdbc17d07110 100644
> --- a/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/include/asm/inst.h
> @@ -199,6 +199,10 @@ enum reg3_op {
>         amswaph_op      = 0x70b9,
>         amaddb_op       = 0x70ba,
>         amaddh_op       = 0x70bb,
> +       amswapdbb_op    = 0x70bc,
> +       amswapdbh_op    = 0x70bd,
> +       amadddbb_op     = 0x70be,
> +       amadddbh_op     = 0x70bf,
>         amswapw_op      = 0x70c0,
>         amswapd_op      = 0x70c1,
>         amaddw_op       = 0x70c2,
> @@ -783,6 +787,20 @@ DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapb, amswapb_op)
>  DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswaph, amswaph_op)
>  DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapw, amswapw_op)
>  DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapd, amswapd_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbb, amswapdbb_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbh, amswapdbh_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbb, amadddbb_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbh, amadddbh_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbw, amadddbw_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amadddbd, amadddbd_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amanddbw, amanddbw_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amanddbd, amanddbd_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amordbw, amordbw_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amordbd, amordbd_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amxordbw, amxordbw_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amxordbd, amxordbd_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbw, amswapdbw_op)
> +DEF_EMIT_REG3_FORMAT(amswapdbd, amswapdbd_op)
>
>  #define DEF_EMIT_REG3SA2_FORMAT(NAME, OP)                              \
>  static inline void emit_##NAME(union loongarch_instruction *insn,      \
> diff --git a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> index 29c281bef28e..5417a5624327 100644
> --- a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,9 @@
>  #include <asm/asm-offsets.h>
>  #include "bpf_jit.h"
>
> +/* dbar hint for ll/sc completion ordering, see __WEAK_LLSC_MB */
> +#define DBAR_LLSC_MB   0x700
> +
>  #define LOONGARCH_MAX_REG_ARGS 8
>
>  #define LOONGARCH_SAVE_RA_NINSNS   1
> @@ -433,7 +436,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>                                 pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amadd.b instruction is not supported\n");
>                                 return -EINVAL;
>                         }
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amaddb, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amadddbb, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_H:
> @@ -441,39 +444,39 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>                                 pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amadd.h instruction is not supported\n");
>                                 return -EINVAL;
>                         }
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amaddh, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amadddbh, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_W:
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amaddw, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amadddbw, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_DW:
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amaddd, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amadddbd, src, t1, t3);
>                         break;
>                 }
>                 break;
>         case BPF_AND | BPF_FETCH:
>                 if (isdw) {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amandd, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amanddbd, src, t1, t3);
>                 } else {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amandw, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amanddbw, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                 }
>                 break;
>         case BPF_OR | BPF_FETCH:
>                 if (isdw) {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amord, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amordbd, src, t1, t3);
>                 } else {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amorw, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amordbw, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                 }
>                 break;
>         case BPF_XOR | BPF_FETCH:
>                 if (isdw) {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amxord, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amxordbd, src, t1, t3);
>                 } else {
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amxorw, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amxordbw, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                 }
>                 break;
> @@ -485,7 +488,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>                                 pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amswap.b instruction is not supported\n");
>                                 return -EINVAL;
>                         }
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapb, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbb, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_H:
> @@ -493,15 +496,15 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>                                 pr_err_once("bpf-jit: amswap.h instruction is not supported\n");
>                                 return -EINVAL;
>                         }
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amswaph, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbh, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_W:
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapw, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbw, src, t1, t3);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, src, true);
>                         break;
>                 case BPF_DW:
> -                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapd, src, t1, t3);
> +                       emit_insn(ctx, amswapdbd, src, t1, t3);
>                         break;
>                 }
>                 break;
> @@ -524,6 +527,7 @@ static int emit_atomic_rmw(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct jit_ctx *ctx)
>                         emit_insn(ctx, beq, t3, LOONGARCH_GPR_ZERO, -6);
>                         emit_zext_32(ctx, r0, true);
>                 }
> +               emit_insn(ctx, dbar, DBAR_LLSC_MB);
>                 break;
>         default:
>                 pr_err_once("bpf-jit: invalid atomic read-modify-write opcode %02x\n", imm);
> --
> 2.25.1
>

[PATCH v4 2/4] LoongArch: bpf: Advertise JIT support for kptr xchg inline

[Chenguang Zhao]

From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>

The BPF verifier can lower bpf_kptr_xchg() to BPF_XCHG when the JIT
advertises ptr xchg support. With ordered amswap_db.* emission from the
previous patch, declare that LoongArch bpf JIT supports this inlining.

Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
---
 arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c | 5 +++++
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)

diff --git a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
index 5417a5624327..686d333146ce 100644
--- a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
+++ b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
@@ -2396,6 +2396,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_fsession(void)
 	return true;
 }
 
+bool bpf_jit_supports_ptr_xchg(void)
+{
+	return true;
+}
+
 /* Indicate the JIT backend supports mixing bpf2bpf and tailcalls. */
 bool bpf_jit_supports_subprog_tailcalls(void)
 {
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v4 2/4] LoongArch: bpf: Advertise JIT support for kptr xchg inline

[Hengqi Chen]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 10:30 AM Chenguang Zhao
<chenguang.zhao@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
>
> The BPF verifier can lower bpf_kptr_xchg() to BPF_XCHG when the JIT
> advertises ptr xchg support. With ordered amswap_db.* emission from the
> previous patch, declare that LoongArch bpf JIT supports this inlining.
>

Acked-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>

> Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>  arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c | 5 +++++
>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> index 5417a5624327..686d333146ce 100644
> --- a/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> +++ b/arch/loongarch/net/bpf_jit.c
> @@ -2396,6 +2396,11 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_fsession(void)
>         return true;
>  }
>
> +bool bpf_jit_supports_ptr_xchg(void)
> +{
> +       return true;
> +}
> +
>  /* Indicate the JIT backend supports mixing bpf2bpf and tailcalls. */
>  bool bpf_jit_supports_subprog_tailcalls(void)
>  {
> --
> 2.25.1
>

[PATCH v4 3/4] selftests/bpf: Enable kptr_xchg_inline test on LoongArch

[Chenguang Zhao]

From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>

Run the kptr_xchg_inline functional test on LoongArch64 now that the bpf
JIT can inline bpf_kptr_xchg() with correct memory ordering.

Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
index 7def158da9eb..1215d6edd590 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
@@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ void test_kptr_xchg_inline(void)
 	int err;
 
 #if !(defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) || \
-      (defined(__riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64))
+	(defined(__riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64) || \
+	(defined(__loongarch__) && __loongarch_grlen == 64))
 	test__skip();
 	return;
 #endif
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] selftests/bpf: Enable kptr_xchg_inline test on LoongArch

[Hengqi Chen]

On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 10:30 AM Chenguang Zhao
<chenguang.zhao@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
>
> Run the kptr_xchg_inline functional test on LoongArch64 now that the bpf
> JIT can inline bpf_kptr_xchg() with correct memory ordering.
>

Acked-by: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>

> Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c | 3 ++-
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
> index 7def158da9eb..1215d6edd590 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kptr_xchg_inline.c
> @@ -14,7 +14,8 @@ void test_kptr_xchg_inline(void)
>         int err;
>
>  #if !(defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) || \
> -      (defined(__riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64))
> +       (defined(__riscv) && __riscv_xlen == 64) || \
> +       (defined(__loongarch__) && __loongarch_grlen == 64))
>         test__skip();
>         return;
>  #endif
> --
> 2.25.1
>

[PATCH v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add kptr-xchg benchmark

[Chenguang Zhao]

From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>

Add a bpf selftest benchmark that exercises bpf_kptr_xchg() in a tight loop
so helper vs inlined JIT paths can be compared on supported architectures.

Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  2 +
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c           |  2 +
 .../selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c    | 96 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c     | 49 ++++++++++
 4 files changed, 149 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
index b642ee489ea6..6dfc81748584 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
@@ -980,6 +980,7 @@ $(OUTPUT)/bench_lpm_trie_map.o: $(OUTPUT)/lpm_trie_bench.skel.h $(OUTPUT)/lpm_tr
 $(OUTPUT)/bench_bpf_nop.o: $(OUTPUT)/bpf_nop_bench.skel.h bench_bpf_timing.h
 $(OUTPUT)/bench_xdp_lb.o: $(OUTPUT)/xdp_lb_bench.skel.h bench_bpf_timing.h
 $(OUTPUT)/bench_bpf_timing.o: bench_bpf_timing.h
+$(OUTPUT)/bench_kptr_xchg.o: $(OUTPUT)/kptr_xchg_bench.skel.h
 $(OUTPUT)/bench.o: bench.h testing_helpers.h $(BPFOBJ)
 $(OUTPUT)/bench: LDLIBS += -lm
 $(OUTPUT)/bench: $(OUTPUT)/bench.o \
@@ -1005,6 +1006,7 @@ $(OUTPUT)/bench: $(OUTPUT)/bench.o \
 		 $(OUTPUT)/bench_bpf_timing.o \
 		 $(OUTPUT)/bench_bpf_nop.o \
 		 $(OUTPUT)/bench_xdp_lb.o \
+		 $(OUTPUT)/bench_kptr_xchg.o \
 		 $(OUTPUT)/usdt_1.o \
 		 $(OUTPUT)/usdt_2.o \
 		 #
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c
index 3d9d2cd7764b..550290d6701a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c
@@ -582,6 +582,7 @@ extern const struct bench bench_lpm_trie_delete;
 extern const struct bench bench_lpm_trie_free;
 extern const struct bench bench_bpf_nop;
 extern const struct bench bench_xdp_lb;
+extern const struct bench bench_kptr_xchg;
 
 static const struct bench *benchs[] = {
 	&bench_count_global,
@@ -665,6 +666,7 @@ static const struct bench *benchs[] = {
 	&bench_lpm_trie_free,
 	&bench_bpf_nop,
 	&bench_xdp_lb,
+	&bench_kptr_xchg,
 };
 
 static void find_benchmark(void)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..b8a0d346fda6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c
@@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (C) 2026. Loongson Technology Corporation Limited */
+#include <argp.h>
+#include "bench.h"
+#include "kptr_xchg_bench.skel.h"
+
+static struct ctx {
+	struct kptr_xchg_bench *skel;
+} ctx;
+
+static struct {
+	__u32 nr_loops;
+} args = {
+	.nr_loops = 256,
+};
+
+enum {
+	ARG_NR_LOOPS = 7000,
+};
+
+static const struct argp_option opts[] = {
+	{ "nr_loops", ARG_NR_LOOPS, "nr_loops", 0,
+	  "Set number of bpf_kptr_xchg() calls per trigger"},
+	{},
+};
+
+static error_t parse_arg(int key, char *arg, struct argp_state *state)
+{
+	switch (key) {
+	case ARG_NR_LOOPS:
+		args.nr_loops = strtol(arg, NULL, 10);
+		break;
+	default:
+		return ARGP_ERR_UNKNOWN;
+	}
+
+	return 0;
+}
+
+static const struct argp bench_kptr_xchg_argp = {
+	.options = opts,
+	.parser = parse_arg,
+};
+
+static void validate(void)
+{
+	if (env.consumer_cnt != 0) {
+		fprintf(stderr, "benchmark doesn't support consumer!\n");
+		exit(1);
+	}
+}
+
+static void *producer(void *input)
+{
+	while (true)
+		syscall(__NR_getpgid);
+
+	return NULL;
+}
+
+static void measure(struct bench_res *res)
+{
+	res->hits = atomic_swap(&ctx.skel->bss->hits, 0);
+}
+
+static void setup(void)
+{
+	struct bpf_link *link;
+
+	setup_libbpf();
+
+	ctx.skel = kptr_xchg_bench__open_and_load();
+	if (!ctx.skel) {
+		fprintf(stderr, "failed to open skeleton\n");
+		exit(1);
+	}
+
+	ctx.skel->data->nr_loops = args.nr_loops;
+
+	link = bpf_program__attach(ctx.skel->progs.benchmark);
+	if (!link) {
+		fprintf(stderr, "failed to attach program!\n");
+		exit(1);
+	}
+}
+
+const struct bench bench_kptr_xchg = {
+	.name = "kptr-xchg",
+	.argp = &bench_kptr_xchg_argp,
+	.validate = validate,
+	.setup = setup,
+	.producer_thread = producer,
+	.measure = measure,
+	.report_progress = ops_report_progress,
+	.report_final = ops_report_final,
+};
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..363883073e2c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c
@@ -0,0 +1,49 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (C) 2026. Loongson Technology Corporation Limited */
+#include "vmlinux.h"
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+
+#include "bpf_experimental.h"
+#include "bpf_misc.h"
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
+
+#define MAX_XCHG_LOOPS 4096
+
+struct bin_data {
+	char blob[32];
+};
+
+#define private(name) SEC(".bss." #name) __hidden __attribute__((aligned(8)))
+
+private(kptr) struct bin_data __kptr *ptr;
+u32 nr_loops = 256;
+long hits;
+
+SEC("fentry/" SYS_PREFIX "sys_getpgid")
+int benchmark(void *ctx)
+{
+	struct bin_data *old;
+	u32 i;
+
+	for (i = 0; i < MAX_XCHG_LOOPS; i++) {
+		if (i >= nr_loops)
+			break;
+
+		old = bpf_kptr_xchg(&ptr, NULL);
+		if (old)
+			bpf_obj_drop(old);
+	}
+
+	__sync_add_and_fetch(&hits, i);
+	return 0;
+}
+
+/*
+ * BTF FUNC records are not generated for kfuncs referenced only through
+ * optimized paths. Keep bpf_obj_drop() visible to libbpf's kfunc linker.
+ */
+void __btf_root(void)
+{
+	bpf_obj_drop(NULL);
+}
-- 
2.25.1

Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add kptr-xchg benchmark

[Tiezhu Yang]

On 2026/7/29 上午10:28, Chenguang Zhao wrote:
> From: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
> 
> Add a bpf selftest benchmark that exercises bpf_kptr_xchg() in a tight loop
> so helper vs inlined JIT paths can be compared on supported architectures.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Chenguang Zhao <zhaochenguang@kylinos.cn>
> ---
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile          |  2 +
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bench.c           |  2 +
>   .../selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c    | 96 +++++++++++++++++++
>   .../selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c     | 49 ++++++++++
>   4 files changed, 149 insertions(+)
>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/benchs/bench_kptr_xchg.c
>   create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kptr_xchg_bench.c

Hi Chenguang,

Please send this generic selftest patch to the BPF mailing list.
It should be routed through the bpf-next tree.

Also, please use the '[PATCH bpf-next]' subject prefix to specify
that this is destined for the bpf-next tree.

For more info, please see:
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/bpf/bpf_devel_QA.html

Thanks,
Tiezhu

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] LoongArch bpf kptr xchg inline support

[Huacai Chen]

Queued the first 3 patches, since the last one is not LoongArch-specific.

Huacai

On Wed, Jul 29, 2026 at 10:29 AM Chenguang Zhao
<chenguang.zhao@linux.dev> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>

Re: [PATCH v4 0/4] LoongArch bpf kptr xchg inline support

[Tiezhu Yang]

On 2026/7/29 上午10:28, Chenguang Zhao wrote:
> 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 first three patches apply cleanly on top of the loongarch-next
branch of linux-loongson.git.

The following selftest passed on LoongArch:

   # ./test_progs -t kptr_xchg_inline

Acked-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Tested-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>

Thanks,
Tiezhu