1. 30 Aug, 2024 5 commits
  2. 29 Aug, 2024 6 commits
  3. 28 Aug, 2024 4 commits
    • Hao Ge's avatar
      selftests/bpf: Fix incorrect parameters in NULL pointer checking · c264487e
      Hao Ge authored
      Smatch reported the following warning:
          ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/testing_helpers.c:455 get_xlated_program()
          warn: variable dereferenced before check 'buf' (see line 454)
      
      It seems correct,so let's modify it based on it's suggestion.
      
      Actually,commit b23ed4d7 ("selftests/bpf: Fix invalid pointer
      check in get_xlated_program()") fixed an issue in the test_verifier.c
      once,but it was reverted this time.
      
      Let's solve this issue with the minimal changes possible.
      Reported-by: default avatarDan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@linaro.org>
      Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/all/1eb3732f-605a-479d-ba64-cd14250cbf91@stanley.mountain/
      Fixes: b4b7a409 ("selftests/bpf: Factor out get_xlated_program() helper")
      Signed-off-by: default avatarHao Ge <gehao@kylinos.cn>
      Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240820023622.29190-1-hao.ge@linux.devSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
      c264487e
    • Alexei Starovoitov's avatar
      Merge branch 'bpf-arm64-simplify-jited-prologue-epilogue' · 4961d8f4
      Alexei Starovoitov authored
      Xu Kuohai says:
      
      ====================
      bpf, arm64: Simplify jited prologue/epilogue
      
      From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
      
      The arm64 jit blindly saves/restores all callee-saved registers, making
      the jited result looks a bit too compliated. For example, for an empty
      prog, the jited result is:
      
         0:   bti jc
         4:   mov     x9, lr
         8:   nop
         c:   paciasp
        10:   stp     fp, lr, [sp, #-16]!
        14:   mov     fp, sp
        18:   stp     x19, x20, [sp, #-16]!
        1c:   stp     x21, x22, [sp, #-16]!
        20:   stp     x26, x25, [sp, #-16]!
        24:   mov     x26, #0
        28:   stp     x26, x25, [sp, #-16]!
        2c:   mov     x26, sp
        30:   stp     x27, x28, [sp, #-16]!
        34:   mov     x25, sp
        38:   bti j 		// tailcall target
        3c:   sub     sp, sp, #0
        40:   mov     x7, #0
        44:   add     sp, sp, #0
        48:   ldp     x27, x28, [sp], #16
        4c:   ldp     x26, x25, [sp], #16
        50:   ldp     x26, x25, [sp], #16
        54:   ldp     x21, x22, [sp], #16
        58:   ldp     x19, x20, [sp], #16
        5c:   ldp     fp, lr, [sp], #16
        60:   mov     x0, x7
        64:   autiasp
        68:   ret
      
      Clearly, there is no need to save/restore unused callee-saved registers.
      This patch does this change, making the jited image to only save/restore
      the callee-saved registers it uses.
      
      Now the jited result of empty prog is:
      
         0:   bti jc
         4:   mov     x9, lr
         8:   nop
         c:   paciasp
        10:   stp     fp, lr, [sp, #-16]!
        14:   mov     fp, sp
        18:   stp     xzr, x26, [sp, #-16]!
        1c:   mov     x26, sp
        20:   bti j		// tailcall target
        24:   mov     x7, #0
        28:   ldp     xzr, x26, [sp], #16
        2c:   ldp     fp, lr, [sp], #16
        30:   mov     x0, x7
        34:   autiasp
        38:   ret
      ====================
      Acked-by: default avatarPuranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
      Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240826071624.350108-1-xukuohai@huaweicloud.comSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
      4961d8f4
    • Xu Kuohai's avatar
      bpf, arm64: Avoid blindly saving/restoring all callee-saved registers · 5d4fa9ec
      Xu Kuohai authored
      The arm64 jit blindly saves/restores all callee-saved registers, making
      the jited result looks a bit too compliated. For example, for an empty
      prog, the jited result is:
      
         0:   bti jc
         4:   mov     x9, lr
         8:   nop
         c:   paciasp
        10:   stp     fp, lr, [sp, #-16]!
        14:   mov     fp, sp
        18:   stp     x19, x20, [sp, #-16]!
        1c:   stp     x21, x22, [sp, #-16]!
        20:   stp     x26, x25, [sp, #-16]!
        24:   mov     x26, #0
        28:   stp     x26, x25, [sp, #-16]!
        2c:   mov     x26, sp
        30:   stp     x27, x28, [sp, #-16]!
        34:   mov     x25, sp
        38:   bti j 		// tailcall target
        3c:   sub     sp, sp, #0
        40:   mov     x7, #0
        44:   add     sp, sp, #0
        48:   ldp     x27, x28, [sp], #16
        4c:   ldp     x26, x25, [sp], #16
        50:   ldp     x26, x25, [sp], #16
        54:   ldp     x21, x22, [sp], #16
        58:   ldp     x19, x20, [sp], #16
        5c:   ldp     fp, lr, [sp], #16
        60:   mov     x0, x7
        64:   autiasp
        68:   ret
      
      Clearly, there is no need to save/restore unused callee-saved registers.
      This patch does this change, making the jited image to only save/restore
      the callee-saved registers it uses.
      
      Now the jited result of empty prog is:
      
         0:   bti jc
         4:   mov     x9, lr
         8:   nop
         c:   paciasp
        10:   stp     fp, lr, [sp, #-16]!
        14:   mov     fp, sp
        18:   stp     xzr, x26, [sp, #-16]!
        1c:   mov     x26, sp
        20:   bti j		// tailcall target
        24:   mov     x7, #0
        28:   ldp     xzr, x26, [sp], #16
        2c:   ldp     fp, lr, [sp], #16
        30:   mov     x0, x7
        34:   autiasp
        38:   ret
      
      Since bpf prog saves/restores its own callee-saved registers as needed,
      to make tailcall work correctly, the caller needs to restore its saved
      registers before tailcall, and the callee needs to save its callee-saved
      registers after tailcall. This extra restoring/saving instructions
      increases preformance overhead.
      
      [1] provides 2 benchmarks for tailcall scenarios. Below is the perf
      number measured in an arm64 KVM guest. The result indicates that the
      performance difference before and after the patch in typical tailcall
      scenarios is negligible.
      
      - Before:
      
       Performance counter stats for './test_progs -t tailcalls' (5 runs):
      
                 4313.43 msec task-clock                       #    0.874 CPUs utilized               ( +-  0.16% )
                     574      context-switches                 #  133.073 /sec                        ( +-  1.14% )
                       0      cpu-migrations                   #    0.000 /sec
                     538      page-faults                      #  124.727 /sec                        ( +-  0.57% )
             10697772784      cycles                           #    2.480 GHz                         ( +-  0.22% )  (61.19%)
             25511241955      instructions                     #    2.38  insn per cycle              ( +-  0.08% )  (66.70%)
              5108910557      branches                         #    1.184 G/sec                       ( +-  0.08% )  (72.38%)
                 2800459      branch-misses                    #    0.05% of all branches             ( +-  0.51% )  (72.36%)
                              TopDownL1                 #     0.60 retiring                    ( +-  0.09% )  (66.84%)
                                                        #     0.21 frontend_bound              ( +-  0.15% )  (61.31%)
                                                        #     0.12 bad_speculation             ( +-  0.08% )  (50.11%)
                                                        #     0.07 backend_bound               ( +-  0.16% )  (33.30%)
              8274201819      L1-dcache-loads                  #    1.918 G/sec                       ( +-  0.18% )  (33.15%)
                  468268      L1-dcache-load-misses            #    0.01% of all L1-dcache accesses   ( +-  4.69% )  (33.16%)
                  385383      LLC-loads                        #   89.345 K/sec                       ( +-  5.22% )  (33.16%)
                   38296      LLC-load-misses                  #    9.94% of all LL-cache accesses    ( +- 42.52% )  (38.69%)
              6886576501      L1-icache-loads                  #    1.597 G/sec                       ( +-  0.35% )  (38.69%)
                 1848585      L1-icache-load-misses            #    0.03% of all L1-icache accesses   ( +-  4.52% )  (44.23%)
              9043645883      dTLB-loads                       #    2.097 G/sec                       ( +-  0.10% )  (44.33%)
                  416672      dTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  ( +-  5.15% )  (49.89%)
              6925626111      iTLB-loads                       #    1.606 G/sec                       ( +-  0.35% )  (55.46%)
                   66220      iTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  ( +-  1.88% )  (55.50%)
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetches
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetch-misses
      
                  4.9372 +- 0.0526 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  1.07% )
      
       Performance counter stats for './test_progs -t flow_dissector' (5 runs):
      
                10924.50 msec task-clock                       #    0.945 CPUs utilized               ( +-  0.08% )
                     603      context-switches                 #   55.197 /sec                        ( +-  1.13% )
                       0      cpu-migrations                   #    0.000 /sec
                     566      page-faults                      #   51.810 /sec                        ( +-  0.42% )
             27381270695      cycles                           #    2.506 GHz                         ( +-  0.18% )  (60.46%)
             56996583922      instructions                     #    2.08  insn per cycle              ( +-  0.21% )  (66.11%)
             10321647567      branches                         #  944.816 M/sec                       ( +-  0.17% )  (71.79%)
                 3347735      branch-misses                    #    0.03% of all branches             ( +-  3.72% )  (72.15%)
                              TopDownL1                 #     0.52 retiring                    ( +-  0.13% )  (66.74%)
                                                        #     0.27 frontend_bound              ( +-  0.14% )  (61.27%)
                                                        #     0.14 bad_speculation             ( +-  0.19% )  (50.36%)
                                                        #     0.07 backend_bound               ( +-  0.42% )  (33.89%)
             18740797617      L1-dcache-loads                  #    1.715 G/sec                       ( +-  0.43% )  (33.71%)
                13715669      L1-dcache-load-misses            #    0.07% of all L1-dcache accesses   ( +- 32.85% )  (33.34%)
                 4087551      LLC-loads                        #  374.164 K/sec                       ( +- 29.53% )  (33.26%)
                  267906      LLC-load-misses                  #    6.55% of all LL-cache accesses    ( +- 23.90% )  (38.76%)
             15811864229      L1-icache-loads                  #    1.447 G/sec                       ( +-  0.12% )  (38.73%)
                 2976833      L1-icache-load-misses            #    0.02% of all L1-icache accesses   ( +-  9.73% )  (44.22%)
             20138907471      dTLB-loads                       #    1.843 G/sec                       ( +-  0.18% )  (44.15%)
                  732850      dTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  ( +- 11.18% )  (49.64%)
             15895726702      iTLB-loads                       #    1.455 G/sec                       ( +-  0.15% )  (55.13%)
                  152075      iTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  ( +-  4.71% )  (54.98%)
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetches
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetch-misses
      
                 11.5613 +- 0.0317 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  0.27% )
      
      - After:
      
       Performance counter stats for './test_progs -t tailcalls' (5 runs):
      
                 4278.78 msec task-clock                       #    0.871 CPUs utilized               ( +-  0.15% )
                     569      context-switches                 #  132.982 /sec                        ( +-  0.58% )
                       0      cpu-migrations                   #    0.000 /sec
                     539      page-faults                      #  125.970 /sec                        ( +-  0.43% )
             10588986432      cycles                           #    2.475 GHz                         ( +-  0.20% )  (60.91%)
             25303825043      instructions                     #    2.39  insn per cycle              ( +-  0.08% )  (66.48%)
              5110756256      branches                         #    1.194 G/sec                       ( +-  0.07% )  (72.03%)
                 2719569      branch-misses                    #    0.05% of all branches             ( +-  2.42% )  (72.03%)
                              TopDownL1                 #     0.60 retiring                    ( +-  0.22% )  (66.31%)
                                                        #     0.22 frontend_bound              ( +-  0.21% )  (60.83%)
                                                        #     0.12 bad_speculation             ( +-  0.26% )  (50.25%)
                                                        #     0.06 backend_bound               ( +-  0.17% )  (33.52%)
              8163648527      L1-dcache-loads                  #    1.908 G/sec                       ( +-  0.33% )  (33.52%)
                  694979      L1-dcache-load-misses            #    0.01% of all L1-dcache accesses   ( +- 30.53% )  (33.52%)
                 1902347      LLC-loads                        #  444.600 K/sec                       ( +- 48.84% )  (33.69%)
                   96677      LLC-load-misses                  #    5.08% of all LL-cache accesses    ( +- 43.48% )  (39.30%)
              6863517589      L1-icache-loads                  #    1.604 G/sec                       ( +-  0.37% )  (39.17%)
                 1871519      L1-icache-load-misses            #    0.03% of all L1-icache accesses   ( +-  6.78% )  (44.56%)
              8927782813      dTLB-loads                       #    2.087 G/sec                       ( +-  0.14% )  (44.37%)
                  438237      dTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  ( +-  6.00% )  (49.75%)
              6886906831      iTLB-loads                       #    1.610 G/sec                       ( +-  0.36% )  (55.08%)
                   67568      iTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  ( +-  3.27% )  (54.86%)
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetches
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetch-misses
      
                  4.9114 +- 0.0309 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  0.63% )
      
       Performance counter stats for './test_progs -t flow_dissector' (5 runs):
      
                10948.40 msec task-clock                       #    0.942 CPUs utilized               ( +-  0.05% )
                     615      context-switches                 #   56.173 /sec                        ( +-  1.65% )
                       1      cpu-migrations                   #    0.091 /sec                        ( +- 31.62% )
                     567      page-faults                      #   51.788 /sec                        ( +-  0.44% )
             27334194328      cycles                           #    2.497 GHz                         ( +-  0.08% )  (61.05%)
             56656528828      instructions                     #    2.07  insn per cycle              ( +-  0.08% )  (66.67%)
             10270389422      branches                         #  938.072 M/sec                       ( +-  0.10% )  (72.21%)
                 3453837      branch-misses                    #    0.03% of all branches             ( +-  3.75% )  (72.27%)
                              TopDownL1                 #     0.52 retiring                    ( +-  0.16% )  (66.55%)
                                                        #     0.27 frontend_bound              ( +-  0.09% )  (60.91%)
                                                        #     0.14 bad_speculation             ( +-  0.08% )  (49.85%)
                                                        #     0.07 backend_bound               ( +-  0.16% )  (33.33%)
             18982866028      L1-dcache-loads                  #    1.734 G/sec                       ( +-  0.24% )  (33.34%)
                 8802454      L1-dcache-load-misses            #    0.05% of all L1-dcache accesses   ( +- 52.30% )  (33.31%)
                 2612962      LLC-loads                        #  238.661 K/sec                       ( +- 29.78% )  (33.45%)
                  264107      LLC-load-misses                  #   10.11% of all LL-cache accesses    ( +- 18.34% )  (39.07%)
             15793205997      L1-icache-loads                  #    1.443 G/sec                       ( +-  0.15% )  (39.09%)
                 3930802      L1-icache-load-misses            #    0.02% of all L1-icache accesses   ( +-  3.72% )  (44.66%)
             20097828496      dTLB-loads                       #    1.836 G/sec                       ( +-  0.09% )  (44.68%)
                  961757      dTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all dTLB cache accesses  ( +-  3.32% )  (50.15%)
             15838728506      iTLB-loads                       #    1.447 G/sec                       ( +-  0.09% )  (55.62%)
                  167652      iTLB-load-misses                 #    0.00% of all iTLB cache accesses  ( +-  1.28% )  (55.52%)
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetches
         <not supported>      L1-dcache-prefetch-misses
      
                 11.6173 +- 0.0268 seconds time elapsed  ( +-  0.23% )
      
      [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200724123644.5096-1-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com/Signed-off-by: default avatarXu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
      Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240826071624.350108-3-xukuohai@huaweicloud.comSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
      5d4fa9ec
    • Xu Kuohai's avatar
      bpf, arm64: Get rid of fpb · bd737fcb
      Xu Kuohai authored
      bpf prog accesses stack using BPF_FP as the base address and a negative
      immediate number as offset. But arm64 ldr/str instructions only support
      non-negative immediate number as offset. To simplify the jited result,
      commit 5b3d19b9 ("bpf, arm64: Adjust the offset of str/ldr(immediate)
      to positive number") introduced FPB to represent the lowest stack address
      that the bpf prog being jited may access, and with this address as the
      baseline, it converts BPF_FP plus negative immediate offset number to FPB
      plus non-negative immediate offset.
      
      Considering that for a given bpf prog, the jited stack space is fixed
      with A64_SP as the lowest address and BPF_FP as the highest address.
      Thus we can get rid of FPB and converts BPF_FP plus negative immediate
      offset to A64_SP plus non-negative immediate offset.
      Signed-off-by: default avatarXu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
      Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240826071624.350108-2-xukuohai@huaweicloud.comSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
      bd737fcb
  4. 27 Aug, 2024 1 commit
  5. 23 Aug, 2024 15 commits
  6. 22 Aug, 2024 9 commits