From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, ys114321@gmail.com,
daniel@iogearbox.net
Cc: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: make PT_REGS_* work in userspace
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2019 15:27:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190703132711.57169-4-iii@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190703132711.57169-1-iii@linux.ibm.com>
Right now, at least on s390 and x86_64, these macros are usable only
with kernel headers. This patch makes it possible to use them with
userspace headers and, as a consequence, in BPF selftests.
On s390, provide the forward declaration of struct pt_regs and cast it
to user_pt_regs in PT_REGS_* macros. This is necessary, because instead
of the full struct pt_regs, s390 exposes only its first member
user_pt_regs to userspace, and bpf_helpers.h is used with both userspace
(in selftests) and kernel (in samples) headers. It was added in commit
466698e654e8 ("s390/bpf: correct broken uapi for
BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT program type").
On x86, provide userspace versions of PT_REGS_* macros. Unlike s390, x86
provides struct pt_regs to both userspace and kernel, however, with
different member names.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h | 36 ++++++++++++++++-------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
index 622dc4af0c65..faf86d83301a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_helpers.h
@@ -355,6 +355,7 @@ static int (*bpf_skb_adjust_room)(void *ctx, __s32 len_diff, __u32 mode,
#if defined(bpf_target_x86)
+#ifdef __KERNEL__
#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->di)
#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->si)
#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->dx)
@@ -365,19 +366,34 @@ static int (*bpf_skb_adjust_room)(void *ctx, __s32 len_diff, __u32 mode,
#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->ax)
#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->sp)
#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->ip)
+#else
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->rdi)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->rsi)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->rdx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) ((x)->rcx)
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) ((x)->r8)
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->rsp)
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->rbp)
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->rax)
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->rsp)
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->rip)
+#endif
#elif defined(bpf_target_s390)
-#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) ((x)->gprs[2])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) ((x)->gprs[3])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) ((x)->gprs[4])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) ((x)->gprs[5])
-#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) ((x)->gprs[6])
-#define PT_REGS_RET(x) ((x)->gprs[14])
-#define PT_REGS_FP(x) ((x)->gprs[11]) /* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
-#define PT_REGS_RC(x) ((x)->gprs[2])
-#define PT_REGS_SP(x) ((x)->gprs[15])
-#define PT_REGS_IP(x) ((x)->psw.addr)
+/* s390 provides user_pt_regs instead of struct pt_regs to userspace */
+struct pt_regs;
+#define PT_REGS_PARM1(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[2])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM2(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[3])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM3(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[4])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM4(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[5])
+#define PT_REGS_PARM5(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[6])
+#define PT_REGS_RET(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[14])
+/* Works only with CONFIG_FRAME_POINTER */
+#define PT_REGS_FP(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[11])
+#define PT_REGS_RC(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[2])
+#define PT_REGS_SP(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->gprs[15])
+#define PT_REGS_IP(x) (((const volatile user_pt_regs *)(x))->psw.addr)
#elif defined(bpf_target_arm)
--
2.21.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-07-03 13:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-07-03 13:27 [PATCH v2 bpf-next 0/4] selftests/bpf: fix compiling loop{1,2,3}.c on s390 Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-03 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/4] selftests/bpf: compile progs with -D__TARGET_ARCH_$(ARCH) Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-03 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/4] selftests/bpf: fix s390 -> s390 typo Ilya Leoshkevich
2019-07-03 13:27 ` Ilya Leoshkevich [this message]
2019-07-03 13:27 ` [PATCH v2 bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: fix compiling loop{1,2,3}.c on s390 Ilya Leoshkevich
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=20190703132711.57169-4-iii@linux.ibm.com \
--to=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ys114321@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).