Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf, riscv: Add BPF stack arguments support for RV64 JIT
Pu Lehui <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.llvm,org.infradead.lists.linux-riscv,org.kernel.vger.bpf,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kselftest |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 2026/8/17 9:52, Pu Lehui wrote: > Hi Feng Jiang, > > On 2026/8/14 9:29, Feng Jiang wrote: >> Add bpf_jit_supports_stack_args() for the RV64 JIT so BPF subprograms >> and kfuncs can receive more than 5 arguments via the stack >> (BPF_REG_PARAMS / r11). >> >> For BPF-to-BPF calls the caller writes outgoing arguments at the >> bottom of its frame (SP-relative). The callee reads them with >> FP-relative loads. Its FP is set to the caller SP in the prologue, >> so the offsets match. >> >> The RISC-V ABI puts arguments 6-8 in A5-A7 and arguments 9+ at >> SP+0. Before each kfunc call, load arguments 6-8 from the outgoing >> area into A5-A7 and copy any remaining arguments down so argument 9 >> lands at SP+0. > > bpf2bpf calls pass extra arguments entirely on the stack, whereas kfuncs > pass them via a mix of registers and the stack. This inconsistency not > only wastes stack slots in kfunc scenarios but is also error-prone and > easy to overlook during maintenance. > > To make argument passing more straightforward and consistent, I think we > can align it with the standard riscv calling convention: use a0-a7 for > the first 8 arguments and pass any remaining arguments on the stack. > > To support this, the current bpf-to-rv register mapping needs to be > revised: > > T0 -> BPF_REG_0 (ftrace use T0 too, but it might not be an issue / needs > verification) > T6 -> TCC > T7 -> BPF_REG_AX (rarely used, so let's move to t7) > > Note that this remapping affects multiple places and requires careful > auditing. Discussed offline with Feng Jiang; I will take over refactoring this patch and post an updated version once it's ready. > >> >> A5 (BPF_REG_0), A6 (TCC) and A7 are safe to clobber here: R0 is not >> live before a call, TCC is backed up on the stack, and A7 is unused >> by the JIT. > > > >> >> Limit the existing kfunc sign-extension loop to MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS >> iterations; otherwise idx >= 5 resolves to S1-S5 (BPF_R6-FP) and >> corrupts callee-saved registers. >> >> Signed-off-by: Feng Jiang <[email protected]> >> --- >> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h | 1 + >> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 79 >> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- >> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c | 4 +++ >> 3 files changed, 81 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h >> index 419b9d795f2a..9eb4e149505d 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h >> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit.h >> @@ -82,6 +82,7 @@ struct rv_jit_context { >> unsigned long flags; >> int stack_size; >> int tcc_offset; >> + u16 stack_arg_size; >> u64 arena_vm_start; >> u64 user_vm_start; >> }; >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> index 6b9972b07c1b..58cb3e5ff6b4 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> @@ -1815,18 +1815,43 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn >> *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, >> if (insn->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL) { >> const struct btf_func_model *fm; >> - int idx; >> + int idx, nargs; >> fm = bpf_jit_find_kfunc_model(ctx->prog, insn); >> if (!fm) >> return -EINVAL; >> - for (idx = 0; idx < fm->nr_args; idx++) { >> + nargs = min_t(int, fm->nr_args, MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS); >> + for (idx = 0; idx < nargs; idx++) { >> u8 reg = bpf_to_rv_reg(BPF_REG_1 + idx, ctx); >> if (fm->arg_size[idx] == sizeof(int)) >> emit_sextw(reg, reg, ctx); >> } >> + >> + /* BPF stack args -> RISC-V ABI: args 6-8 in A5-A7, 9+ at >> SP+0 */ >> + if (fm->nr_args > MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS) { >> + int n_stack = fm->nr_args - MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS; >> + int n_reg = min_t(int, n_stack, >> + RV_MAX_REG_ARGS - MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS); >> + >> + for (idx = 0; idx < n_reg; idx++) { >> + int sz = fm->arg_size[MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS + idx]; >> + >> + emit_ld(RV_REG_A5 + idx, idx * 8, RV_REG_SP, ctx); >> + if (sz == sizeof(int)) >> + emit_sextw(RV_REG_A5 + idx, RV_REG_A5 + idx, >> ctx); >> + } >> + >> + for (idx = n_reg; idx < n_stack; idx++) { >> + int sz = fm->arg_size[MAX_BPF_FUNC_REG_ARGS + idx]; >> + >> + emit_ld(RV_REG_T1, idx * 8, RV_REG_SP, ctx); >> + if (sz == sizeof(int)) >> + emit_sextw(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, ctx); >> + emit_sd(RV_REG_SP, (idx - n_reg) * 8, RV_REG_T1, >> ctx); >> + } >> + } > > looks a bit complicated, how about the following after redefine regmap: > > ``` > for (idx = 0; idx < fm->nr_args; idx++) { > if (idx < RV_MAX_REG_ARGS) { > u8 reg = RV_REG_A0 + idx; > > sign_extend(reg, reg, xxx) > } else { > load from stack to T1 > sign_extend > retore from T1 to orig stack slot > } > } > ``` > >> } >> /* restore TCC to RV_REG_TCC before bpf2bpf call */ >> @@ -1891,6 +1916,21 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn >> *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H: >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W: >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW: >> + if (insn->src_reg == BPF_REG_PARAMS) { > > pls use is_stack_arg_ldx/st/stx instead. > >> + int idx = off / 8 - 1; >> + >> + if (is_12b_int(idx * 8)) { >> + emit_ldx_insn(rd, idx * 8, RV_REG_FP, BPF_SIZE(code), >> false, ctx); >> + } else { >> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, idx * 8, ctx); >> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_FP, ctx); >> + emit_ldx_insn(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1, BPF_SIZE(code), >> false, ctx); >> + } >> + if (BPF_SIZE(code) != BPF_DW && insn_is_zext(&insn[1])) >> + return 1; >> + break; > > This piece of code was refactored not long ago. Let's see if we can > merge it into the logic below or fold it into emit_ldx—let's give it a try. > >> + } >> + fallthrough; >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_B: >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_H: >> case BPF_LDX | BPF_PROBE_MEM | BPF_W: >> @@ -1938,6 +1978,20 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn >> *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, >> case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_H: >> case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_W: >> case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW: >> + if (insn->dst_reg == BPF_REG_PARAMS) { >> + int idx = -off / 8 - 1; >> + >> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx); >> + if (is_12b_int(idx * 8)) { >> + emit_stx_insn(RV_REG_SP, idx * 8, RV_REG_T1, >> BPF_SIZE(code), ctx); >> + } else { >> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T2, idx * 8, ctx); >> + emit_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_SP, RV_REG_T2, ctx); >> + emit_stx_insn(RV_REG_T2, 0, RV_REG_T1, >> BPF_SIZE(code), ctx); >> + } >> + break; >> + } >> + fallthrough; > > ditto > >> /* ST | PROBE_MEM32: *(size *)(dst + RV_REG_ARENA + off) = imm */ >> case BPF_ST | BPF_PROBE_MEM32 | BPF_B: >> case BPF_ST | BPF_PROBE_MEM32 | BPF_H: >> @@ -1960,6 +2014,19 @@ int bpf_jit_emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn >> *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx, >> case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H: >> case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W: >> case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW: >> + if (insn->dst_reg == BPF_REG_PARAMS) { >> + int idx = -off / 8 - 1; >> + >> + if (is_12b_int(idx * 8)) { >> + emit_stx_insn(RV_REG_SP, idx * 8, rs, BPF_SIZE(code), >> ctx); >> + } else { >> + emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, idx * 8, ctx); >> + emit_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_SP, RV_REG_T1, ctx); >> + emit_stx_insn(RV_REG_T1, 0, rs, BPF_SIZE(code), ctx); >> + } >> + break; >> + } >> + fallthrough; > > ditto > >> /* STX | PROBE_MEM32: *(size *)(dst + RV_REG_ARENA + off) = src */ >> case BPF_STX | BPF_PROBE_MEM32 | BPF_B: >> case BPF_STX | BPF_PROBE_MEM32 | BPF_H: >> @@ -2036,6 +2103,7 @@ void bpf_jit_build_prologue(struct >> rv_jit_context *ctx, bool is_subprog) >> stack_adjust = round_up(stack_adjust, STACK_ALIGN); >> stack_adjust += bpf_stack_adjust; >> + stack_adjust += ctx->stack_arg_size; >> store_offset = stack_adjust - 8; >> @@ -2093,7 +2161,7 @@ void bpf_jit_build_prologue(struct >> rv_jit_context *ctx, bool is_subprog) >> emit_addi(RV_REG_FP, RV_REG_SP, stack_adjust, ctx); >> if (bpf_stack_adjust) >> - emit_addi(RV_REG_S5, RV_REG_SP, bpf_stack_adjust, ctx); >> + emit_addi(RV_REG_S5, RV_REG_SP, ctx->stack_arg_size + >> bpf_stack_adjust, ctx); >> ctx->stack_size = stack_adjust; >> @@ -2171,3 +2239,8 @@ bool bpf_jit_supports_timed_may_goto(void) >> { >> return true; >> } >> + >> +bool bpf_jit_supports_stack_args(void) >> +{ >> + return true; >> +} >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c >> b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c >> index cbfcd287ea16..844a0f3e0fa9 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c >> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_core.c >> @@ -72,6 +72,10 @@ struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct >> bpf_verifier_env *env, struct bpf_pr >> ctx->arena_vm_start = >> bpf_arena_get_kern_vm_start(prog->aux->arena); >> ctx->user_vm_start = bpf_arena_get_user_vm_start(prog->aux->arena); >> ctx->prog = prog; >> + >> + ctx->stack_arg_size = round_up(bpf_out_stack_arg_cnt(env, prog) * >> + sizeof(u64), STACK_ALIGN); > > It's not u64—since every stack slot is aligned to the pointer size > (sizeof(long)), I think using 8 is fine. > >> + >> ctx->offset = kvzalloc_objs(int, prog->len); >> if (!ctx->offset) >> goto out_offset; >> > > _______________________________________________ > linux-riscv mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv