From: Hari Bathini <hbathini@linux.ibm.com>
To: Saket Kumar Bhaskar <skb99@linux.ibm.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: maddy@linux.ibm.com, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, shuah@kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org,
venkat88@linux.ibm.com, yeswanth@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 0/8] powerpc/bpf: address missing verifier selftest coverage
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 23:04:04 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7ffaff94-b1b1-4420-8c19-c88bf49139a6@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1785871099.git.skb99@linux.ibm.com>
On 05/08/26 11:36 am, Saket Kumar Bhaskar wrote:
> From: Abhishek Dubey <adubey@linux.ibm.com>
>
> The verifier selftest validates JITed instructions by matching expected
> disassembly output. The first two patches fix issues in powerpc instruction
> disassembly that were causing test flow failures. The fix is common for
> 64-bit & 32-bit powerpc. Add support for the powerpc-specific "__powerpc64"
> architecture tag in the third patch, enabling proper test filtering in
> verifier test files. Introduce verifier testcases for tailcalls on powerpc64.
>
> The first patch in series is fix patch, correcting memory alignment with
> 8-byte boundary for long branch address field. The subsequent patches
> enables verifier selftests on powerpc. The fifth patch in the series fixes
> incorrect comparator usage for comparing tailcall info with tailcall
> threshold. The last two patches fix JIT buffer overflow for large BPF progs
> and private stack memory leak (identified by bot during reviews).
>
> Issue Details:
> --------------
>
> The Long branch stub in the trampoline implementation[1] provides
> flexibility to handles short as well as long branch distance to
> actual trampoline. Whereas, the 8 bytes long dummy_tramp_addr field
> sitting before long branch stub leads to failure when enabling
> verifier based seltest for ppc64.
>
> The verifier selftests require disassembing the final jited image
> to get native instructions. Later the disassembled instruction
> sequence is matched against sequence of instructions provided in
> test-file under __jited() wrapper. The final jited image contains
> Out-of-line stub and Long branch stub as part of epilogue jitting
> for a bpf program. The 8 bytes space for dummy_tramp is sandwiched
> between both above mentioned stubs. These 8 bytes contain memory
> address of dummy trampoline during trampoline invocation which don't
> correspond to any powerpc instructions. So, disassembly fails
> resulting in failure of verifier selftests.
>
> The following code snippet shows the problem with current arrangement
> made for dummy_tramp_addr.
>
> /* Out-of-line stub */
> mflr r0
> [b|bl] tramp
> mtlr r0 //only with OOL
> b bpf_func + 4
> /* Long branch stub */
> .long <dummy_tramp_addr> <---Invalid bytes sequence, disassembly fails
> mflr r11
> bcl 20,31,$+4
> mflr r12
> ld r12, -8-SZL(r12)
> mtctr r12
> mtlr r11 //retain ftrace ABI
> bctr
>
> Consider test program binary of size 112 bytes:
> 0: 00000060 10004de8 00002039 f8ff21f9 81ff21f8 7000e1fb 3000e13b
> 28: 3000e13b 2a006038 f8ff7ff8 00000039 7000e1eb 80002138 7843037d
> 56: 2000804e a602087c 00000060 a603087c bcffff4b c0341d00 000000c0
> 84: a602687d 05009f42 a602887d f0ff8ce9 a603897d a603687d 2004804e
>
> Disassembly output of above binary for ppc64le:
> pc:0 left:112 00 00 00 60 : nop
> pc:4 left:108 10 00 4d e8 : ld 2, 16(13)
> pc:8 left:104 00 00 20 39 : li 9, 0
> pc:12 left:100 f8 ff 21 f9 : std 9, -8(1)
> pc:16 left:96 81 ff 21 f8 : stdu 1, -128(1)
> pc:20 left:92 70 00 e1 fb : std 31, 112(1)
> pc:24 left:88 30 00 e1 3b : addi 31, 1, 48
> pc:28 left:84 30 00 e1 3b : addi 31, 1, 48
> pc:32 left:80 2a 00 60 38 : li 3, 42
> pc:36 left:76 f8 ff 7f f8 : std 3, -8(31)
> pc:40 left:72 00 00 00 39 : li 8, 0
> pc:44 left:68 70 00 e1 eb : ld 31, 112(1)
> pc:48 left:64 80 00 21 38 : addi 1, 1, 128
> pc:52 left:60 78 43 03 7d : mr 3, 8
> pc:56 left:56 20 00 80 4e : blr
> pc:60 left:52 a6 02 08 7c : mflr 0
> pc:64 left:48 00 00 00 60 : nop
> pc:68 left:44 a6 03 08 7c : mtlr 0
> pc:72 left:40 bc ff ff 4b : b .-68
> pc:76 left:36 c0 34 1d 00 :
> ...
>
> Failure log:
> Can't disasm instruction at offset 76: c0 34 1d 00 00 00 00 c0 a6 02 68 7d 05 00 9f 42
> --------------------------------------
>
> Observation:
> Can't disasm instruction at offset 76 as this address has
> ".long <dummy_tramp_addr>" (0xc0341d00000000c0)
> But valid instructions follow at offset 84 onwards.
>
> Move the long branch address space to the bottom of the long
> branch stub. This allows uninterrupted disassembly until the
> last 8 bytes. Exclude these last bytes from the overall
> program length to prevent failure in assembly generation.
>
> Following is disassembler output for same test program with moved down
> dummy_tramp_addr field:
> .....
> .....
> pc:68 left:44 a6 03 08 7c : mtlr 0
> pc:72 left:40 bc ff ff 4b : b .-68
> pc:76 left:36 a6 02 68 7d : mflr 11
> pc:80 left:32 05 00 9f 42 : bcl 20, 31, .+4
> pc:84 left:28 a6 02 88 7d : mflr 12
> pc:88 left:24 14 00 8c e9 : ld 12, 20(12)
> pc:92 left:20 a6 03 89 7d : mtctr 12
> pc:96 left:16 a6 03 68 7d : mtlr 11
> pc:100 left:12 20 04 80 4e : bctr
> pc:104 left:8 c0 34 1d 00 :
>
> Failure log:
> Can't disasm instruction at offset 104: c0 34 1d 00 00 00 00 c0
> ---------------------------------------
> Disassembly logic can truncate at 104, ignoring last 8 bytes.
>
> Update the dummy_tramp_addr field offset calculation from the end
> of the program to reflect its new location, for bpf_arch_text_poke()
> to update the actual trampoline's address in this field.
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241030070850.1361304-18-hbathini@linux.ibm.com
>
> v9->v10:
> Modified expected JIT instruction in selftest for
> CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PCREL incase of PPC_LI64 instruction.
> Fix for stale entries in exception table
> Update ARCH_POWERPC64 enum value to 0x40 to resolve rebase
> conflict with ARCH_LOONGARCH (0x20).
>
> v8->v9:
> Dynamic pass handling until code keeps shrinking
> Fix private stack memory leak
>
> v7->v8:
> Fixed bot identified issues of alt_exit_addr and BPF_EXIT
> Fixed 32-bit ppc function signature mismatch
>
> v6->v7:
> Fixed JIT buffer overflow in case of large BPF progs
> Addressed remaining bot comments
>
> v5->v6:
> Changed alignment NOP emittion dependency on fimage layout
> Adjust tail truncate length for 32-bit ppc
> Addressed few minor bot comments
>
> v4->v5:
> Handled alignment NOP emit logic and corresponding stub offsets
> Handled image buffer overflow problem in last pass
> Above changes took care of other bot reviews
> Included LLVMDisposeMessage() for graceful freeing
> Adjusted parameters in bpf_jit_build_fentry_stubs for ppc32
> Adjusted expected JIT inst. in tailcall test for
> CONFIG_PPC_KERNEL_PCREL config
> Added fix patch at last for inaccurate use of cmplwi inst.
>
> v3->v4:
> Changed logic for emitting alignment NOP
>
> v2->v3:
> Removed fixed NOP from bottom of long branch stub
> Rebased on top of bpf-next
>
> v1->v2:
> Added fix-patch to correct memory alignment in-place
> Moved the optional alignmnet NOP before OOL stub
>
> [v1]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260225013627.22098-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v2]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260403004011.44417-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v3]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260411221413.44304-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v4]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260517214043.12975-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v5]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260519233812.18787-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v6]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260529015855.364704-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v7]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260611153826.31187-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v8]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260616164741.32252-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com
> [v9]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260623231411.6216-1-adubey@linux.ibm.com/
>
> Abhishek Dubey (8):
> powerpc/bpf: fix alignment of long branch trampoline addres to t
> powerpc/bpf: Move out dummy_tramp_addr after Long branch stub
> selftest/bpf: Fixing powerpc JIT disassembly failure
> selftest/bpf: Enable verifier selftest for powerpc64
> powerpc64/bpf: fix compare instruction emitted for tailcall
> selftest/bpf: Add tailcall verifier selftest for powerpc64
> powerpc/bpf: fix buffer overflow in JIT for large BPF programs
> powerpc64/bpf: fix percpu private stack leak on JIT failure
>
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit.h | 20 +++-
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 102 +++++++++++++-----
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp32.c | 7 +-
> arch/powerpc/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 15 +--
> .../selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c | 25 ++++-
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_misc.h | 1 +
> .../bpf/progs/verifier_tailcall_jit.c | 74 +++++++++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c | 5 +
> 8 files changed, 209 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
>
Alexei, Maddy,
Given this has changes in common code too, should this go via bpf tree?
If yes, @Saket can you post the next revision with bpf tag to make
it explicit...
- Hari
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-06 17:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-05 6:06 [PATCH v10 0/8] powerpc/bpf: address missing verifier selftest coverage Saket Kumar Bhaskar
2026-08-06 17:34 ` Hari Bathini [this message]
2026-08-07 3:21 ` Madhavan Srinivasan
2026-08-07 11:47 ` Saket Kumar Bhaskar
2026-08-07 11:42 ` [PATCH v11 " Saket Kumar Bhaskar
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=7ffaff94-b1b1-4420-8c19-c88bf49139a6@linux.ibm.com \
--to=hbathini@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skb99@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=venkat88@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=yeswanth@linux.ibm.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