Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/4] Support bpf trampoline for RV64 | From | Daniel Borkmann <> | Date | Fri, 17 Feb 2023 21:49:00 +0100 |
| |
On 2/16/23 10:56 AM, Björn Töpel wrote: > Pu Lehui <pulehui@huaweicloud.com> writes: > >> BPF trampoline is the critical infrastructure of the bpf >> subsystem, acting as a mediator between kernel functions >> and BPF programs. Numerous important features, such as >> using ebpf program for zero overhead kernel introspection, >> rely on this key component. We can't wait to support bpf >> trampoline on RV64. Since RV64 does not support ftrace >> direct call yet, the current RV64 bpf trampoline is only >> used in bpf context. >> >> As most of riscv cpu support unaligned memory accesses, >> we temporarily use patch [1] to facilitate testing. The >> test results are as follow, and test_verifier with no >> new failure ceses. >> >> - fexit_bpf2bpf:OK >> - dummy_st_ops:OK >> - xdp_bpf2bpf:OK >> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20210916130855.4054926-2-chenhuang5@huawei.com/ >> >> v1: >> - Remove the logic of bpf_arch_text_poke supported for >> kernel functions. (Kuohai and Björn) >> - Extend patch_text for multiple instructions. (Björn) >> - Fix OOB issue when image too big. (Björn) > > This series is ready to go in as is.
Ok.
> @Palmer I'd like to take this series via the bpf-next tree (as usual), > but note that there are some non-BPF changes as well, related to text > poking. > > @Lehui I'd like to see two follow-up patches: > > 1. Enable kfunc for RV64, by adding: > | bool bpf_jit_supports_kfunc_call(void) > | { > | return true; > | } > > 2. Remove the checkpatch warning on patch 4: > | WARNING: kfree(NULL) is safe and this check is probably not required > | #313: FILE: arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c:984: > | + if (branches_off) > | + kfree(branches_off); > > > For the series: > > Tested-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@rivosinc.com> > Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@rivosinc.com>
Thanks, I fixed up issue 2 and cleaned up the commit msgs while applying. For issue 1, pls send a follow-up.
| |