From: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@gmail.com>
To: Tony Ambardar <tony.ambardar@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Miguel Ojeda <ojeda@kernel.org>,
kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 09:56:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Zl7IscCtZVKjgP2h@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e9c64e9b5c073dabd457ff45128aabcab7630098.1717477560.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
On Mon, Jun 03, 2024 at 10:23:16PM -0700, Tony Ambardar wrote:
> BPF kfuncs are often not directly referenced and may be inadvertently
> removed by optimization steps during kernel builds, thus the __bpf_kfunc
> tag mitigates against this removal by including the __used macro. However,
> this macro alone does not prevent removal during linking, and may still
> yield build warnings (e.g. on mips64el):
>
> LD vmlinux
> BTFIDS vmlinux
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lookup_user_key
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_lookup_system_key
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_key_put
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_iter_task_next
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_iter_css_task_new
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_get_file_xattr
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_ct_insert_entry
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_release
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_from_id
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_cgroup_acquire
> WARN: resolve_btfids: unresolved symbol bpf_arena_free_pages
> NM System.map
> SORTTAB vmlinux
> OBJCOPY vmlinux.32
>
> Update the __bpf_kfunc tag to better guard against linker optimization by
> including the new __retain compiler macro, which fixes the warnings above.
>
> Verify the __retain macro with readelf by checking object flags for 'R':
>
> $ readelf -Wa kernel/trace/bpf_trace.o
> Section Headers:
> [Nr] Name Type Address Off Size ES Flg Lk Inf Al
> ...
> [178] .text.bpf_key_put PROGBITS 00000000 6420 0050 00 AXR 0 0 8
> ...
> Key to Flags:
> ...
> R (retain), D (mbind), p (processor specific)
>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZlmGoT9KiYLZd91S@krava/T/
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/r/202401211357.OCX9yllM-lkp@intel.com/
> Fixes: 57e7c169cd6a ("bpf: Add __bpf_kfunc tag for marking kernel functions as kfuncs")
> Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org # v6.6+
> Signed-off-by: Tony Ambardar <Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
tested on mips64 cross build and the warnings are gone
and related functions are in the vmlinux
patchset looks good to me
Tested-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
thanks,
jirka
> ---
> include/linux/btf.h | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/btf.h b/include/linux/btf.h
> index f9e56fd12a9f..7c3e40c3295e 100644
> --- a/include/linux/btf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/btf.h
> @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@
> * as to avoid issues such as the compiler inlining or eliding either a static
> * kfunc, or a global kfunc in an LTO build.
> */
> -#define __bpf_kfunc __used noinline
> +#define __bpf_kfunc __used __retain noinline
>
> #define __bpf_kfunc_start_defs() \
> __diag_push(); \
> --
> 2.34.1
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-04 7:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Zl2GtXy7+Xfr66lX@kodidev-ubuntu>
[not found] ` <cover.1717413886.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
2024-06-03 12:16 ` [PATCH bpf v1 1/2] Compiler Attributes: Add __retain macro Tony Ambardar
2024-06-03 13:57 ` Miguel Ojeda
2024-06-04 2:37 ` Tony Ambardar
2024-06-03 12:16 ` [PATCH bpf v1 2/2] bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal Tony Ambardar
[not found] ` <cover.1717477560.git.Tony.Ambardar@gmail.com>
2024-06-04 5:23 ` [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] compiler_types.h: Define __retain for __attribute__((__retain__)) Tony Ambardar
2024-06-05 5:55 ` Yonghong Song
2024-06-10 22:56 ` Tony Ambardar
2024-06-14 18:47 ` Yonghong Song
2024-06-15 6:57 ` Tony Ambardar
2024-06-17 3:26 ` Yonghong Song
2024-06-04 5:23 ` [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] bpf: Harden __bpf_kfunc tag against linker kfunc removal Tony Ambardar
2024-06-04 7:56 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2024-06-25 10:46 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
2024-06-26 9:52 ` Jiri Olsa
2024-06-26 11:40 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
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=Zl7IscCtZVKjgP2h@krava \
--to=olsajiri@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=lkp@intel.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=ojeda@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.ambardar@gmail.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@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