lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    From
    Date
    SubjectRe: [PATCH v6 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: introduce bpf_prog_pack allocator
    On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 4:50 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
    >
    > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 4:38 PM Alexei Starovoitov
    > <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
    > >
    > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 3:09 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > >
    > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 2:48 PM Alexei Starovoitov
    > > > <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > >
    > > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 2:25 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 12:00 PM Alexei Starovoitov
    > > > > > <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 11:21 PM Song Liu <song@kernel.org> wrote:
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 9:21 PM Alexei Starovoitov
    > > > > > > > <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > On Mon, Jan 24, 2022 at 10:27 AM Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com> wrote:
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > Are arches expected to allocate rw buffers in different ways? If not,
    > > > > > > > > > > I would consider putting this into the common code as well. Then
    > > > > > > > > > > arch-specific code would do something like
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > header = bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack(size, &prg_buf, &prg_addr, ...);
    > > > > > > > > > > ...
    > > > > > > > > > > /*
    > > > > > > > > > > * Generate code into prg_buf, the code should assume that its first
    > > > > > > > > > > * byte is located at prg_addr.
    > > > > > > > > > > */
    > > > > > > > > > > ...
    > > > > > > > > > > bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack(header, prg_buf);
    > > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > > where bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack() would copy prg_buf to header and
    > > > > > > > > > > free it.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > It feels right, but bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack() sounds 100% arch
    > > > > > > > > dependent. The only thing it will do is perform a copy via text_poke.
    > > > > > > > > What else?
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > I think this should work.
    > > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > > We will need an API like: bpf_arch_text_copy, which uses text_poke_copy()
    > > > > > > > > > for x86_64 and s390_kernel_write() for x390. We will use bpf_arch_text_copy
    > > > > > > > > > to
    > > > > > > > > > 1) write header->size;
    > > > > > > > > > 2) do finally copy in bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack().
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > we can combine all text_poke operations into one.
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Can we add an 'image' pointer into struct bpf_binary_header ?
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > There is a 4-byte hole in bpf_binary_header. How about we put
    > > > > > > > image_offset there? Actually we only need 2 bytes for offset.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > Then do:
    > > > > > > > > int bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack(size, &ro_hdr, &rw_hdr);
    > > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > > ro_hdr->image would be the address used to compute offsets by JIT.
    > > > > > > >
    > > > > > > > If we only do one text_poke(), we cannot write ro_hdr->image yet. We
    > > > > > > > can use ro_hdr + rw_hdr->image_offset instead.
    > > > > > >
    > > > > > > Good points.
    > > > > > > Maybe let's go back to Ilya's suggestion and return 4 pointers
    > > > > > > from bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack ?
    > > > > >
    > > > > > How about we use image_offset, like:
    > > > > >
    > > > > > struct bpf_binary_header {
    > > > > > u32 size;
    > > > > > u32 image_offset;
    > > > > > u8 image[] __aligned(BPF_IMAGE_ALIGNMENT);
    > > > > > };
    > > > > >
    > > > > > Then we can use
    > > > > >
    > > > > > image = (void *)header + header->image_offset;
    > > > >
    > > > > I'm not excited about it, since it leaks header details into JITs.
    > > > > Looks like we don't need JIT to be aware of it.
    > > > > How about we do random() % roundup(sizeof(struct bpf_binary_header), 64)
    > > > > to pick the image start and populate
    > > > > image-sizeof(struct bpf_binary_header) range
    > > > > with 'int 3'.
    > > > > This way we can completely hide binary_header inside generic code.
    > > > > The bpf_jit_binary_alloc_pack() would return ro_image and rw_image only.
    > > > > And JIT would pass them back into bpf_jit_binary_finalize_pack().
    > > > > From the image pointer it would be trivial to get to binary_header with &63.
    > > > > The 128 byte offset that we use today was chosen arbitrarily.
    > > > > We were burning the whole page for a single program, so 128 bytes zone
    > > > > at the front was ok.
    > > > > Now we will be packing progs rounded up to 64 bytes, so it's better
    > > > > to avoid wasting those 128 bytes regardless.
    > > >
    > > > In bpf_jit_binary_hdr(), we calculate header as image & PAGE_MASK.
    > > > If we want s/PAGE_MASK/63 for x86_64, we will have different versions
    > > > of bpf_jit_binary_hdr(). It is not on any hot path, so we can use __weak for
    > > > it. Other than this, I think the solution works fine.
    > >
    > > I think it can stay generic.
    > >
    > > The existing bpf_jit_binary_hdr() will do & PAGE_MASK
    > > while bpf_jit_binary_hdr_pack() will do & 63.
    >
    > The problem with this approach is that we need bpf_prog_ksym_set_addr
    > to be smart to pick bpf_jit_binary_hdr() or bpf_jit_binary_hdr_pack().

    We can probably add a true JIT image size to bpf_prog_aux.
    bpf_prog_ksym_set_addr() is approximating the end:
    prog->aux->ksym.end = addr + hdr->pages * PAGE_SIZE
    which doesn't have to include all the 'int 3' padding after the end.

    Or add a flag to bpf_prog_aux.
    Ideally bpf_jit_free() would stay generic too.

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2022-01-26 02:20    [W:2.923 / U:0.680 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site