From: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
To: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Zi Shen Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
x86@kernel.org, "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
Russell King <rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>, Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>,
Jason Wang <wangborong@cdjrlc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 4/4] bpf, arm64: bpf trampoline for arm64
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2022 09:24:22 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YsfptiexC0wFABFL@myrica> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a24109d5-b79a-99de-0fd5-66b0ec34e5ed@huawei.com>
On Fri, Jul 08, 2022 at 12:35:33PM +0800, Xu Kuohai wrote:
> >> +
> >> + emit(A64_ADD_I(1, A64_R(0), A64_SP, args_off), ctx);
> >> + if (!p->jited)
> >> + emit_addr_mov_i64(A64_R(1), (const u64)p->insnsi, ctx);
> >> +
> >> + emit_call((const u64)p->bpf_func, ctx);
> >> +
> >> + /* store return value */
> >> + if (save_ret)
> >> + emit(A64_STR64I(r0, A64_SP, retval_off), ctx);
> >
> > Here too I think it should be x0. I'm guessing r0 may work for jitted
> > functions but not interpreted ones
> >
>
> Yes, r0 is only correct for jitted code, will fix it to:
>
> if (save_ret)
> emit(A64_STR64I(p->jited ? r0 : A64_R(0), A64_SP, retval_off),
> ctx);
I don't think we need this test because x0 should be correct in all cases.
x7 happens to equal x0 when jitted due to the way build_epilogue() builds
the function at the moment, but we shouldn't rely on that.
> >> + if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG) {
> >> + restore_args(ctx, args_off, nargs);
> >> + /* call original func */
> >> + emit(A64_LDR64I(A64_R(10), A64_SP, retaddr_off), ctx);
> >> + emit(A64_BLR(A64_R(10)), ctx);
> >
> > I don't think we can do this when BTI is enabled because we're not jumping
> > to a BTI instruction. We could introduce one in a patched BPF function
> > (there currently is one if CONFIG_ARM64_PTR_AUTH_KERNEL), but probably not
> > in a kernel function.
> >
> > We could fo like FUNCTION_GRAPH_TRACER does and return to the patched
> > function after modifying its LR. Not sure whether that works with pointer
> > auth though.
> >
>
> Yes, the blr instruction should be replaced with ret instruction, thanks!
>
> The layout for bpf prog and regular kernel function is as follows, with
> bti always coming first and paciasp immediately after patchsite, so the
> ret instruction should work in all cases.
>
> bpf prog or kernel function:
> bti c // if BTI
> mov x9, lr
> bl <trampoline> ------> trampoline:
> ...
> mov lr, <return_entry>
> mov x10, <ORIG_CALL_entry>
> ORIG_CALL_entry: <------- ret x10
> return_entry:
> ...
> paciasp // if PA
> ...
Actually I just noticed that CONFIG_ARM64_BTI_KERNEL depends on
CONFIG_ARM64_PTR_AUTH_KERNEL, so we should be able to rely on there always
being a PACIASP at ORIG_CALL_entry, and since it's a landing pad for BLR
we don't need to make this a RET
92e2294d870b ("arm64: bti: Support building kernel C code using BTI")
Thanks,
Jean
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-08 8:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-25 16:12 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/4] bpf trampoline for arm64 Xu Kuohai
2022-06-25 16:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/4] bpf: Remove is_valid_bpf_tramp_flags() Xu Kuohai
2022-06-25 16:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/4] arm64: Add LDR (literal) instruction Xu Kuohai
2022-07-05 16:39 ` Will Deacon
2022-07-06 1:43 ` Xu Kuohai
2022-06-25 16:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 3/4] bpf, arm64: Impelment bpf_arch_text_poke() for arm64 Xu Kuohai
2022-07-07 16:41 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-07-08 2:41 ` Xu Kuohai
2022-07-08 8:25 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-06-25 16:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 4/4] bpf, arm64: bpf trampoline " Xu Kuohai
2022-07-07 16:37 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-07-08 4:35 ` Xu Kuohai
2022-07-08 8:24 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker [this message]
2022-07-08 9:08 ` Xu Kuohai
2022-06-30 21:12 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/4] " Daniel Borkmann
2022-07-05 16:00 ` Will Deacon
2022-07-05 18:34 ` KP Singh
2022-07-07 3:35 ` Xu Kuohai
2022-07-06 16:08 ` Jean-Philippe Brucker
2022-07-06 16:11 ` Will Deacon
2022-07-07 2:56 ` Xu Kuohai
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=YsfptiexC0wFABFL@myrica \
--to=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@kernel.org \
--cc=hawk@kernel.org \
--cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rmk+kernel@armlinux.org.uk \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=wangborong@cdjrlc.com \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xukuohai@huawei.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
--cc=zlim.lnx@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).