From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f46.google.com (mail-wm1-f46.google.com [209.85.128.46]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 19C392882A7 for ; Sun, 4 Jan 2026 11:56:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767527783; cv=none; b=eECPRhsGhwKwhlRI5xJ1ialr0aEUvAVfSi09X099CJCPDKwNl5Hy/MprDWXpYxsj3bl/xG8hU48OobbHolxr1ULHPJyfjTKHh5edQbtKxsI+g3vEb4uWI/bCQLRqkqmKKr6du525FxEzDJGqW6/8fACWov7GbspENY634qeji1Q= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1767527783; c=relaxed/simple; bh=GAoHNm2kxQ3VVMYBhOd0J23ZuTQPhy4Pg9gBc2k7exk=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BIN0goNzZRqcJHmYjcnzq6duy9P8jrAWrPllmlu3xYt5nii1mKIRmeZhYur2x97491/lGqCD5nzLYrpjKXpU+BeMkyUqkOZnqF2UHNCszhyeUiYPdnoQs8Faa7RTqJJJgJWretbjGVBR9lDKf1LBa5JDdM4lOPXpvXIfqiyD9Mw= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=hvmWHaNV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="hvmWHaNV" Received: by mail-wm1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-47796a837c7so85050815e9.0 for ; Sun, 04 Jan 2026 03:56:20 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1767527779; x=1768132579; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HHWuScMnE43MBF17SntuhCPn9/ypQW7BMwUOJWNkTIA=; b=hvmWHaNVEpnLx5kUvhRSHFpEoR9HQcpWjX/LoBkx5uBs4lAHExfoY97zVOiqunoUka ZC5B30hZsZ9T6BWuhyppNvQt5TQxtDIEMnf4pFS5cmEZWLih3KyY2b8tQ1xmj9aVyoIN x486/7nrbgwLywAD6HB/DQg0ZL7FPFXeMA7NwciFHloYMLGKA1ERPFU2m7lNkQmA7alJ To//iag9Jqr+Kr1v7vTzEoQzmTH/9yx4IjvbhlgZFSfgtPrGSN7vO9S3H0sR7ew6QpXF Ig35DxxoZDki118NbtdgqYMLmIOLhYND5qons/ldOm0KsLaHmzrSVAZPl/3HXWGKdQao OeuQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1767527779; x=1768132579; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:date:from:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HHWuScMnE43MBF17SntuhCPn9/ypQW7BMwUOJWNkTIA=; b=weI7/2ZbErcWO+otTtRk1lRA7NWFABdrNNrzkp4DsoMNBEEobKmbxTeUMDWmLILs+C FYYuey860ROJn6VbZ1Hg27O1W+V2mw07AEQUTsG829M9EdEy0SiUtgMuBy076qCu1gLe 402KUcoQIW+Zsvw0EGFGRyVFwSXp5r+lHSUotyce/8UVNhtyRGYB17i0ZXB5mYUBRIsK OMCPZg81uOzKWbNcjX6WaXbQjs5M4xREy9PyslWEkngUua6m8hmC0skOQWeK8tusSuBJ Sy5ERXm/sl3I6t00Fs+TXChtOoHbL/VLQji6aW5xYkvNKg4MR7EgzH87t312noOIWtkZ NcBg== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX9ocS2BGAqr9lVQllwctGKecnj9aLUEon0prOjQ5QFb5c/KcoH0+TEBT0iEzkiAaUNNPcqI2wUwdVLwzg25MOx8+0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyEsn4CQpAOIv1opmgC/JTySCfYeinYfNcqa5pDSd1ht2dN8oVI 5QMUcRvTa9biil8wi3QLbDEsENsw6U6eC96La+z6/H02U9/gEHgqsxWl X-Gm-Gg: AY/fxX6UfKo7WKV9hkRXV7Sj8dbTRG2ZBi/ad9g09uCk2cR4Iz/SLtzJYy5Z+Qp39p2 bq0YWrbeC3g2ZkNVluSYU6OOi27NoCNKM3CCRDh9fMCMY11yTYc5AAKsMvvVmzmyCtCFOnwI5Ci YezYVZk4buGdb/bc7E0aLGeF7Fkrkby8LfHk/0aR5X/qvf3aW56znetMh/1k/ZVp8y4X5bFTufG LB7baZOXcwcdz2QJBxET6W64geRHyZ+pTq9AiHhqRBCeQrJHH7BT2ehhkhn1TO7AHi6rfo11jqb lEs1Px1BXlsiwJ/Z95gd3qdo1JXF8hFTVKrGojw3604WxXAh4yI5kvc4TfhpGpOsiCw+LG62m1F wQoOtwPKM2YmY8Xfnyt0GkAnWtpWe5jSLidYFD9cjHM3kT3QkOHl8SGGAhimi X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHIZnfdFKqNFB8eAXksIPvZyz9IWgsHY++6OlvULt6SnYStqYI9H7OUETi7olVZTWz0wUJceA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:a31c:b0:47d:264e:b435 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-47d264eb68dmr411443735e9.22.1767527779267; Sun, 04 Jan 2026 03:56:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from krava ([2a02:8308:a00c:e200::b44f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-47d6ba5001esm36036965e9.3.2026.01.04.03.56.18 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sun, 04 Jan 2026 03:56:18 -0800 (PST) From: Jiri Olsa X-Google-Original-From: Jiri Olsa Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2026 12:56:17 +0100 To: Will Deacon Cc: Masami Hiramatsu , Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, Yonghong Song , Song Liu , Andrii Nakryiko , Mark Rutland , Mahe Tardy Subject: Re: [BUG/RFC 1/2] arm64/ftrace,bpf: Fix partial regs after bpf_prog_run Message-ID: References: <20251105125924.365205-1-jolsa@kernel.org> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Fri, Jan 02, 2026 at 02:52:25PM +0000, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Nov 05, 2025 at 01:59:23PM +0100, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > hi, > > Mahe reported issue with bpf_override_return helper not working > > when executed from kprobe.multi bpf program on arm. > > > > The problem seems to be that on arm we use alternate storage for > > pt_regs object that is passed to bpf_prog_run and if any register > > is changed (which is the case of bpf_override_return) it's not > > propagated back to actual pt_regs object. > > > > The change below seems to fix the issue, but I have no idea if > > that's proper fix for arm, thoughts? > > > > I'm attaching selftest to actually test bpf_override_return helper > > functionality, because currently we only test that we are able to > > attach a program with it, but not the override itself. > > > > thanks, > > jirka > > > > > > --- > > arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h | 11 +++++++++++ > > include/linux/ftrace.h | 3 +++ > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 1 + > > 3 files changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > > index ba7cf7fec5e9..ad6cf587885c 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/ftrace.h > > @@ -157,6 +157,17 @@ ftrace_partial_regs(const struct ftrace_regs *fregs, struct pt_regs *regs) > > return regs; > > } > > > > +static __always_inline void > > +ftrace_partial_regs_fix(const struct ftrace_regs *fregs, struct pt_regs *regs) > > +{ > > + struct __arch_ftrace_regs *afregs = arch_ftrace_regs(fregs); > > + > > + if (afregs->pc != regs->pc) { > > + afregs->pc = regs->pc; > > + afregs->regs[0] = regs->regs[0]; > > + } > > +} > > This looks a bit grotty to me and presumably other architectures would > need similar treatement. Wouldn't it be cleaner to reuse the existing > API instead? For example, by calling ftrace_regs_set_instruction_pointer() > and ftrace_regs_set_return_value() to update the relevant registers from > the core code? I knew I forgot some change.. thanks for replying ftrace_partial_regs is overloaded in arm64 and because of that we need to propagate the change to pt_regs, so I think the ftrace_partial_regs_fix code is arm64 specific, so can't see that in core code also wrt ftrace_partial_regs_fix name, I was thinking it might be better to have begin/end functions, like: ftrace_partial_regs_begin ftrace_partial_regs_end thanks, jirka --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c @@ -2560,10 +2560,11 @@ kprobe_multi_link_prog_run(struct bpf_kprobe_multi_link *link, } rcu_read_lock(); - regs = ftrace_partial_regs(fregs, bpf_kprobe_multi_pt_regs_ptr()); + regs = ftrace_partial_regs_begin(fregs, bpf_kprobe_multi_pt_regs_ptr()); old_run_ctx = bpf_set_run_ctx(&run_ctx.session_ctx.run_ctx); err = bpf_prog_run(link->link.prog, regs); bpf_reset_run_ctx(old_run_ctx); + ftrace_partial_regs_end(fregs, bpf_kprobe_multi_pt_regs_ptr()); rcu_read_unlock(); out: