From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: 'Alexei Starovoitov ' <ast@kernel.org>,
'Andrii Nakryiko ' <andrii@kernel.org>,
'Daniel Borkmann ' <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
'Amery Hung ' <ameryhung@gmail.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH bpf-next 09/12] bpf: Add bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 15:46:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250418224652.105998-10-martin.lau@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250418224652.105998-1-martin.lau@linux.dev>
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
In the kernel fq qdisc implementation, it only needs to look at
the fields of the first node in a list but does not always
need to remove it from the list. It is more convenient to have
a peek kfunc for the list. It works similar to the bpf_rbtree_first().
This patch adds bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc. The verifier is changed
such that the kfunc returning "struct bpf_list_node *" will be
marked as non-owning. The exception is the KF_ACQUIRE kfunc. The
net effect is only the new bpf_list_{front,back} kfuncs will
have its return pointer marked as non-owning.
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 12 ++++++++++--
2 files changed, 32 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 36150d340c16..78cefb41266a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -2293,6 +2293,26 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_pop_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
return __bpf_list_del(head, true);
}
+__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_front(struct bpf_list_head *head)
+{
+ struct list_head *h = (struct list_head *)head;
+
+ if (list_empty(h) || unlikely(!h->next))
+ return NULL;
+
+ return (struct bpf_list_node *)h->next;
+}
+
+__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_list_node *bpf_list_back(struct bpf_list_head *head)
+{
+ struct list_head *h = (struct list_head *)head;
+
+ if (list_empty(h) || unlikely(!h->next))
+ return NULL;
+
+ return (struct bpf_list_node *)h->prev;
+}
+
__bpf_kfunc struct bpf_rb_node *bpf_rbtree_remove(struct bpf_rb_root *root,
struct bpf_rb_node *node)
{
@@ -3236,6 +3256,8 @@ BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_front, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_pop_back, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_front, KF_RET_NULL)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_list_back, KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_task_acquire, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RCU | KF_RET_NULL)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_task_release, KF_RELEASE)
BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_rbtree_remove, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index aacde0274e0f..78a9b3d1cd29 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -12079,6 +12079,8 @@ enum special_kfunc_type {
KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl,
KF_bpf_list_pop_front,
KF_bpf_list_pop_back,
+ KF_bpf_list_front,
+ KF_bpf_list_back,
KF_bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx,
KF_bpf_rdonly_cast,
KF_bpf_rcu_read_lock,
@@ -12124,6 +12126,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_front)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rdonly_cast)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rbtree_remove)
@@ -12160,6 +12164,8 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_front_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_push_back_impl)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_front)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_pop_back)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_front)
+BTF_ID(func, bpf_list_back)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_cast_to_kern_ctx)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rdonly_cast)
BTF_ID(func, bpf_rcu_read_lock)
@@ -12598,7 +12604,9 @@ static bool is_bpf_list_api_kfunc(u32 btf_id)
return btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_front_impl] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_push_back_impl] ||
btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_front] ||
- btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_back];
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_pop_back] ||
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_front] ||
+ btf_id == special_kfunc_list[KF_bpf_list_back];
}
static bool is_bpf_rbtree_api_kfunc(u32 btf_id)
@@ -13902,7 +13910,7 @@ static int check_kfunc_call(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_insn *insn,
if (is_kfunc_ret_null(&meta))
regs[BPF_REG_0].id = id;
regs[BPF_REG_0].ref_obj_id = id;
- } else if (is_rbtree_node_type(ptr_type)) {
+ } else if (is_rbtree_node_type(ptr_type) || is_list_node_type(ptr_type)) {
ref_set_non_owning(env, ®s[BPF_REG_0]);
}
--
2.47.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-18 22:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-18 22:46 [RFC PATCH bpf-next 00/12] bpf: A fq example similar to the kernel sch_fq.c implementation Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 01/12] bpf: Check KF_bpf_rbtree_add_impl for the "case KF_ARG_PTR_TO_RB_NODE" Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:05 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 02/12] bpf: Simplify reg0 marking for the rbtree kfuncs that return a bpf_rb_node pointer Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:14 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 03/12] bpf: Add bpf_rbtree_{root,left,right} kfunc Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:43 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 04/12] selftests/bpf: Adjust failure message in the rbtree_fail test Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 1:44 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 05/12] bpf: Allow refcounted bpf_rb_node used in bpf_rbtree_{remove,left,right} Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 2:32 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 06/12] selftests/bpf: Adjust test that does not allow refcounted node in rbtree_remove Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 2:36 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-22 2:48 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 07/12] selftests/bpf: Add rbtree_search test Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:03 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 08/12] bpf: Simplify reg0 marking for the list kfuncs that return a bpf_list_node pointer Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:05 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2025-04-22 3:07 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 09/12] bpf: Add bpf_list_{front,back} kfunc Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 10/12] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_list_{front,back} Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-22 3:08 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2025-04-25 23:28 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 11/12] bpf: net: Add a qdisc kfunc to set sk_pacing_status Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-18 22:46 ` [RFC PATCH bpf-next 12/12] selftests/bpf: A bpf fq implementation similar to the kernel sch_fq Martin KaFai Lau
2025-04-25 0:13 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2025-04-25 23:50 ` Martin KaFai Lau
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=20250418224652.105998-10-martin.lau@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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).