From: "Emil Tsalapatis" <emil@etsalapatis.com>
To: "Chengkaitao" <pilgrimtao@gmail.com>, <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: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 4/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr
Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2026 19:23:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DH8UIK9AQRV0.KZTEGI7CK0AV@etsalapatis.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260316112843.78657-5-pilgrimtao@gmail.com>
On Mon Mar 16, 2026 at 7:28 AM EDT, Chengkaitao wrote:
> From: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
>
> Refactor __bpf_list_add to accept (new, head, struct list_head **prev_ptr,
> ..) instead of (node, head, bool tail, ..). Load prev from *prev_ptr after
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(h), so we never dereference an uninitialized h->prev when
> head was 0-initialized (e.g. push_back passes &h->prev).
>
> When prev is not the list head, validate that prev is in the list via
> its owner.
>
> Prepares for bpf_list_add_impl(head, new, prev, ..) to insert after a
> given list node.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kaitao Cheng <chengkaitao@kylinos.cn>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 44 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> index dac346eb1e2f..a9665f97b3bc 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> @@ -2379,11 +2379,13 @@ __bpf_kfunc void *bpf_refcount_acquire_impl(void *p__refcounted_kptr, void *meta
> return (void *)p__refcounted_kptr;
> }
>
> -static int __bpf_list_add(struct bpf_list_node_kern *node,
> +static int __bpf_list_add(struct bpf_list_node_kern *new,
> struct bpf_list_head *head,
> - bool tail, struct btf_record *rec, u64 off)
> + struct list_head **prev_ptr,
> + struct btf_record *rec, u64 off)
> {
> - struct list_head *n = &node->list_head, *h = (void *)head;
> + struct list_head *n = &new->list_head, *h = (void *)head;
> + struct list_head *prev;
>
> /* If list_head was 0-initialized by map, bpf_obj_init_field wasn't
> * called on its fields, so init here
> @@ -2391,39 +2393,49 @@ static int __bpf_list_add(struct bpf_list_node_kern *node,
> if (unlikely(!h->next))
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(h);
>
> - /* node->owner != NULL implies !list_empty(n), no need to separately
> + prev = *prev_ptr;
> +
> + /* When prev is not the list head, it must be a node in this list. */
> + if (prev != h && WARN_ON_ONCE(READ_ONCE(container_of(
> + prev, struct bpf_list_node_kern, list_head)->owner) != head))
> + goto fail;
> +
This is pretty difficult to read, can you clean this up?
> + /* new->owner != NULL implies !list_empty(n), no need to separately
> * check the latter
> */
> - if (cmpxchg(&node->owner, NULL, BPF_PTR_POISON)) {
> - /* Only called from BPF prog, no need to migrate_disable */
> - __bpf_obj_drop_impl((void *)n - off, rec, false);
> - return -EINVAL;
> - }
> -
> - tail ? list_add_tail(n, h) : list_add(n, h);
> - WRITE_ONCE(node->owner, head);
> + if (cmpxchg(&new->owner, NULL, BPF_PTR_POISON))
> + goto fail;
>
> + list_add(n, prev);
> + WRITE_ONCE(new->owner, head);
> return 0;
> +
> +fail:
> + /* Only called from BPF prog, no need to migrate_disable */
> + __bpf_obj_drop_impl((void *)n - off, rec, false);
> + return -EINVAL;
> }
>
> __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_front_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
> struct bpf_list_node *node,
> void *meta__ign, u64 off)
> {
> - struct bpf_list_node_kern *n = (void *)node;
> + struct bpf_list_node_kern *new = (void *)node;
I don't think this rename or the one in __bpf_list_add are useful, they
also kind of obfuscate the point of the patch by accident imo.
> struct btf_struct_meta *meta = meta__ign;
> + struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
>
> - return __bpf_list_add(n, head, false, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
> + return __bpf_list_add(new, head, &h, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
> }
>
> __bpf_kfunc int bpf_list_push_back_impl(struct bpf_list_head *head,
> struct bpf_list_node *node,
> void *meta__ign, u64 off)
> {
> - struct bpf_list_node_kern *n = (void *)node;
> + struct bpf_list_node_kern *new = (void *)node;
> struct btf_struct_meta *meta = meta__ign;
> + struct list_head *h = (void *)head;
>
> - return __bpf_list_add(n, head, true, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
> + return __bpf_list_add(new, head, &h->prev, meta ? meta->record : NULL, off);
> }
>
> static struct bpf_list_node *__bpf_list_del(struct bpf_list_head *head,
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-03-21 23:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-16 11:28 [PATCH bpf-next v8 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Chengkaitao
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 1/8] bpf: refactor kfunc checks using table-driven approach in verifier Chengkaitao
2026-03-19 15:39 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 2/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_del to take list node pointer Chengkaitao
2026-03-19 16:17 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 3/8] bpf: Introduce the bpf_list_del kfunc Chengkaitao
2026-03-16 12:10 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-03-21 2:45 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 4/8] bpf: refactor __bpf_list_add to take insertion point via **prev_ptr Chengkaitao
2026-03-21 23:23 ` Emil Tsalapatis [this message]
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 5/8] bpf: Add bpf_list_add_impl to insert node after a given list node Chengkaitao
2026-03-22 0:45 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 6/8] bpf: allow bpf_list_front/back result as the prev argument of bpf_list_add_impl Chengkaitao
2026-03-16 14:29 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 7/8] bpf: add bpf_list_is_first/last/empty kfuncs Chengkaitao
2026-03-22 1:01 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-22 1:20 ` Emil Tsalapatis
2026-03-16 11:28 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 8/8] selftests/bpf: Add test cases for bpf_list_del/add/is_first/is_last/empty Chengkaitao
2026-03-19 16:18 ` [PATCH bpf-next v8 0/8] bpf: Extend the bpf_list family of APIs Emil Tsalapatis
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=DH8UIK9AQRV0.KZTEGI7CK0AV@etsalapatis.com \
--to=emil@etsalapatis.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=pilgrimtao@gmail.com \
--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