From: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, eddyz87@gmail.com,
memxor@gmail.com, martin.lau@kernel.org, shakeel.butt@linux.dev,
roman.gushchin@linux.dev, kuniyu@google.com,
kerneljasonxing@gmail.com, ameryhung@gmail.com,
kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 01/15] bpf: Remove __rcu tagging in st_link->map
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2026 10:49:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260623175006.3136053-2-ameryhung@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260623175006.3136053-1-ameryhung@gmail.com>
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
st_link->map is always written under update_mutex. The paths that read
st_link->map with rcu_read_lock() are not in the fast path, so they can
simply take update_mutex instead. Remove the __rcu annotation and replace
all RCU accessors with direct pointer reads under update_mutex. Use
READ_ONCE() in bpf_struct_ops_map_link_poll() which reads the pointer
without holding update_mutex.
It is a simplification change.
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
---
kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c | 29 ++++++++++++++---------------
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
index 51b16e5f5534..d06b3d9bcc13 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c
@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ struct bpf_struct_ops_map {
struct bpf_struct_ops_link {
struct bpf_link link;
- struct bpf_map __rcu *map;
+ struct bpf_map *map;
wait_queue_head_t wait_hup;
};
@@ -1257,8 +1257,7 @@ static void bpf_struct_ops_map_link_dealloc(struct bpf_link *link)
struct bpf_struct_ops_map *st_map;
st_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);
- st_map = (struct bpf_struct_ops_map *)
- rcu_dereference_protected(st_link->map, true);
+ st_map = (struct bpf_struct_ops_map *)st_link->map;
if (st_map) {
st_map->st_ops_desc->st_ops->unreg(&st_map->kvalue.data, link);
bpf_map_put(&st_map->map);
@@ -1273,11 +1272,11 @@ static void bpf_struct_ops_map_link_show_fdinfo(const struct bpf_link *link,
struct bpf_map *map;
st_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);
- rcu_read_lock();
- map = rcu_dereference(st_link->map);
+ mutex_lock(&update_mutex);
+ map = st_link->map;
if (map)
seq_printf(seq, "map_id:\t%d\n", map->id);
- rcu_read_unlock();
+ mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
}
static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_fill_link_info(const struct bpf_link *link,
@@ -1287,11 +1286,11 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_fill_link_info(const struct bpf_link *link,
struct bpf_map *map;
st_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);
- rcu_read_lock();
- map = rcu_dereference(st_link->map);
+ mutex_lock(&update_mutex);
+ map = st_link->map;
if (map)
info->struct_ops.map_id = map->id;
- rcu_read_unlock();
+ mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
return 0;
}
@@ -1314,7 +1313,7 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_update(struct bpf_link *link, struct bpf_map
mutex_lock(&update_mutex);
- old_map = rcu_dereference_protected(st_link->map, lockdep_is_held(&update_mutex));
+ old_map = st_link->map;
if (!old_map) {
err = -ENOLINK;
goto err_out;
@@ -1336,7 +1335,7 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_update(struct bpf_link *link, struct bpf_map
goto err_out;
bpf_map_inc(new_map);
- rcu_assign_pointer(st_link->map, new_map);
+ WRITE_ONCE(st_link->map, new_map);
bpf_map_put(old_map);
err_out:
@@ -1353,7 +1352,7 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link)
mutex_lock(&update_mutex);
- map = rcu_dereference_protected(st_link->map, lockdep_is_held(&update_mutex));
+ map = st_link->map;
if (!map) {
mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
return 0;
@@ -1362,7 +1361,7 @@ static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link)
st_map->st_ops_desc->st_ops->unreg(&st_map->kvalue.data, link);
- RCU_INIT_POINTER(st_link->map, NULL);
+ WRITE_ONCE(st_link->map, NULL);
/* Pair with bpf_map_get() in bpf_struct_ops_link_create() or
* bpf_map_inc() in bpf_struct_ops_map_link_update().
*/
@@ -1382,7 +1381,7 @@ static __poll_t bpf_struct_ops_map_link_poll(struct file *file,
poll_wait(file, &st_link->wait_hup, pts);
- return rcu_access_pointer(st_link->map) ? 0 : EPOLLHUP;
+ return READ_ONCE(st_link->map) ? 0 : EPOLLHUP;
}
static const struct bpf_link_ops bpf_struct_ops_map_lops = {
@@ -1438,7 +1437,7 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_link_create(union bpf_attr *attr)
link = NULL;
goto err_out;
}
- RCU_INIT_POINTER(link->map, map);
+ link->map = map;
mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
return bpf_link_settle(&link_primer);
--
2.53.0-Meta
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-23 17:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-23 17:49 [PATCH bpf-next v2 00/15] bpf: A common way to attach struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` Amery Hung [this message]
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 02/15] bpf: Make struct_ops tasks_rcu grace period optional Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 03/15] bpf: Add bpf_struct_ops accessor helpers Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 04/15] bpf: Remove unnecessary prog_list_prog() check Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 05/15] bpf: Replace prog_list_prog() check with direct pl->prog and pl->link check Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 06/15] bpf: Add prog_list_init_item(), prog_list_replace_item(), and prog_list_id() Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 07/15] bpf: Move LSM trampoline unlink into bpf_cgroup_link_auto_detach() Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 08/15] bpf: Add a few bpf_cgroup_array_* helper functions Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 09/15] bpf: Add infrastructure to support attaching struct_ops to cgroups Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 10/15] bpf: Allow all struct_ops to use bpf_dynptr_from_skb() Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:49 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 11/15] bpf: tcp: Support selected sock_ops callbacks as struct_ops Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 12/15] bpf: tcp: Support parse/len/write header option hooks in bpf_tcp_ops Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 13/15] libbpf: Support attaching struct_ops to a cgroup Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 14/15] selftests/bpf: Test " Amery Hung
2026-06-23 17:50 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/15] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_tcp_ops header option hooks Amery Hung
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=20260623175006.3136053-2-ameryhung@gmail.com \
--to=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kerneljasonxing@gmail.com \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=roman.gushchin@linux.dev \
--cc=shakeel.butt@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