| Message ID | 20211103115453.397209-1-bjorn@kernel.org (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | f47d4ffe3a84ae11fc4bddc37939b9719467042c |
| Delegated to: | BPF |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bpf-next] riscv, bpf: Fix RV32 broken build, and silence RV64 warning | expand |
On 11/3/21 12:54 PM, Björn Töpel wrote: > Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only > addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception > tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. > > Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF > JIT. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202111020610.9oy9Rr0G-lkp@intel.com/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202110290334.2zdMyRq4-lkp@intel.com/ > > Fixes: 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") > Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> > --- > Tong/Daniel: The RV32 build has been broken since Thursday. I'll try > to fast-track a bit, and commit a quick-fix for it. Hope that's OK > with you, Tong! > > I've verified the build on my machine using riscv32 GCC 9.3.0 and > riscv64 GCC 11.2.0. Thanks for the fix Bjorn! > arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 4 ++-- > arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 2 ++ > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > index 18bf338303b6..ddb7d3b99e89 100644 > --- a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ > #include <linux/module.h> > #include <linux/uaccess.h> > > -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT > +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) > int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs); > #endif > > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs) > if (!fixup) > return 0; > > -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT > +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) > if (regs->epc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START && regs->epc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END) > return rv_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs); > #endif > diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > index 2ca345c7b0bf..f2a779c7e225 100644 > --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > @@ -459,6 +459,8 @@ static int emit_call(bool fixed, u64 addr, struct rv_jit_context *ctx) > #define BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK GENMASK(26, 0) > #define BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK GENMASK(31, 27) > > +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, > + struct pt_regs *regs); I'm okay to take this as a quick fix, but if its not too much hassle, could we add a arch/riscv/include/asm/extable.h in similar fashion like arm64 or x86 where we move the ex_handler_bpf() signature there, did you have a chance to check? > int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, > struct pt_regs *regs) > { > > base-commit: cc0356d6a02e064387c16a83cb96fe43ef33181e > Thanks, Daniel
On 2021/11/3 21:15, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > On 11/3/21 12:54 PM, Björn Töpel wrote: >> Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only >> addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception >> tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. >> >> Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF >> JIT. >> >> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202111020610.9oy9Rr0G-lkp@intel.com/ >> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202110290334.2zdMyRq4-lkp@intel.com/ >> >> Fixes: 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") >> Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> >> --- >> Tong/Daniel: The RV32 build has been broken since Thursday. I'll try >> to fast-track a bit, and commit a quick-fix for it. Hope that's OK >> with you, Tong! >> >> I've verified the build on my machine using riscv32 GCC 9.3.0 and >> riscv64 GCC 11.2.0. > > Thanks for the fix Bjorn! > >> arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 4 ++-- >> arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 2 ++ >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c >> index 18bf338303b6..ddb7d3b99e89 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c >> +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c >> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ >> #include <linux/module.h> >> #include <linux/uaccess.h> >> -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT >> +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) >> int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs); >> #endif >> @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs) >> if (!fixup) >> return 0; >> -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT >> +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) >> if (regs->epc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START && regs->epc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END) >> return rv_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs); >> #endif >> diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> index 2ca345c7b0bf..f2a779c7e225 100644 >> --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c >> @@ -459,6 +459,8 @@ static int emit_call(bool fixed, u64 addr, struct rv_jit_context *ctx) >> #define BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK GENMASK(26, 0) >> #define BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK GENMASK(31, 27) >> +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, >> + struct pt_regs *regs); > > I'm okay to take this as a quick fix, but if its not too much hassle, could we add a > arch/riscv/include/asm/extable.h in similar fashion like arm64 or x86 where we move > the ex_handler_bpf() signature there, did you have a chance to check? Hi Daniel: On the question of whether to add asm/extable.h, I have an in-depth discussion with Björn, both schemes are OK. This patch is the scheme of adding a header file: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211102145642.724820-1-tongtiangen@huawei.com/ Reviewed-by: Tong Tiangen <tongtiangen@huawei.com> Thanks. > >> int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, >> struct pt_regs *regs) >> { >> >> base-commit: cc0356d6a02e064387c16a83cb96fe43ef33181e >> > > Thanks, > Daniel > . >
On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 at 14:15, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote: > > On 11/3/21 12:54 PM, Björn Töpel wrote: > > Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only > > addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception > > tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. > > > > Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF > > JIT. > > > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202111020610.9oy9Rr0G-lkp@intel.com/ > > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202110290334.2zdMyRq4-lkp@intel.com/ > > > > Fixes: 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") > > Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> > > --- > > Tong/Daniel: The RV32 build has been broken since Thursday. I'll try > > to fast-track a bit, and commit a quick-fix for it. Hope that's OK > > with you, Tong! > > > > I've verified the build on my machine using riscv32 GCC 9.3.0 and > > riscv64 GCC 11.2.0. > > Thanks for the fix Bjorn! > > > arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 4 ++-- > > arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 2 ++ > > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > > index 18bf338303b6..ddb7d3b99e89 100644 > > --- a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > > +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c > > @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ > > #include <linux/module.h> > > #include <linux/uaccess.h> > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT > > +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) > > int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs); > > #endif > > > > @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs) > > if (!fixup) > > return 0; > > > > -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT > > +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) > > if (regs->epc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START && regs->epc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END) > > return rv_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs); > > #endif > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > index 2ca345c7b0bf..f2a779c7e225 100644 > > --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c > > @@ -459,6 +459,8 @@ static int emit_call(bool fixed, u64 addr, struct rv_jit_context *ctx) > > #define BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK GENMASK(26, 0) > > #define BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK GENMASK(31, 27) > > > > +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, > > + struct pt_regs *regs); > > I'm okay to take this as a quick fix, but if its not too much hassle, could we add a > arch/riscv/include/asm/extable.h in similar fashion like arm64 or x86 where we move > the ex_handler_bpf() signature there, did you have a chance to check? > OK! I've not looked into it yet! There's a patch out from Jisheng on the RV list, which is starting some consolidation work [1]. @Jisheng What do you think about adding type/handlers [2,3] as arm64/x86 recently did, to your series? Björn [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20211022001957.1eba8f04@xhacker/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20211019160219.5202-11-mark.rutland@arm.com/ [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210908132525.211958725@linutronix.de/
On 11/3/21 2:35 PM, Björn Töpel wrote: > On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 at 14:15, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote: >> On 11/3/21 12:54 PM, Björn Töpel wrote: >>> Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only >>> addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception >>> tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. >>> >>> Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF >>> JIT. >>> >>> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202111020610.9oy9Rr0G-lkp@intel.com/ >>> [2] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202110290334.2zdMyRq4-lkp@intel.com/ >>> >>> Fixes: 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") >>> Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> >>> --- >>> Tong/Daniel: The RV32 build has been broken since Thursday. I'll try >>> to fast-track a bit, and commit a quick-fix for it. Hope that's OK >>> with you, Tong! >>> >>> I've verified the build on my machine using riscv32 GCC 9.3.0 and >>> riscv64 GCC 11.2.0. >> >> Thanks for the fix Bjorn! >> [...] >>> +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, >>> + struct pt_regs *regs); >> >> I'm okay to take this as a quick fix, but if its not too much hassle, could we add a >> arch/riscv/include/asm/extable.h in similar fashion like arm64 or x86 where we move >> the ex_handler_bpf() signature there, did you have a chance to check? > > OK! I've not looked into it yet! > > There's a patch out from Jisheng on the RV list, which is starting > some consolidation work [1]. > > @Jisheng What do you think about adding type/handlers [2,3] as > arm64/x86 recently did, to your series? Fyi, Bjorn, took your fix into bpf so we can move forward wrt broken build & warning given its small anyway and I'm doing bpf PR very soon today. Either way, Jisheng, you or Tong can follow-up looking into the extable streamlining wrt arm64/x86. Thanks! > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20211022001957.1eba8f04@xhacker/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-arm-kernel/20211019160219.5202-11-mark.rutland@arm.com/ > [3] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20210908132525.211958725@linutronix.de/
Hello: This patch was applied to bpf/bpf.git (master) by Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>: On Wed, 3 Nov 2021 12:54:53 +0100 you wrote: > Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only > addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception > tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. > > Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF > JIT. > > [...] Here is the summary with links: - [bpf-next] riscv, bpf: Fix RV32 broken build, and silence RV64 warning https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf/c/f47d4ffe3a84 You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c index 18bf338303b6..ddb7d3b99e89 100644 --- a/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c +++ b/arch/riscv/mm/extable.c @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ #include <linux/module.h> #include <linux/uaccess.h> -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs); #endif @@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ int fixup_exception(struct pt_regs *regs) if (!fixup) return 0; -#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT +#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && defined(CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I) if (regs->epc >= BPF_JIT_REGION_START && regs->epc < BPF_JIT_REGION_END) return rv_bpf_fixup_exception(fixup, regs); #endif diff --git a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c index 2ca345c7b0bf..f2a779c7e225 100644 --- a/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c +++ b/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c @@ -459,6 +459,8 @@ static int emit_call(bool fixed, u64 addr, struct rv_jit_context *ctx) #define BPF_FIXUP_OFFSET_MASK GENMASK(26, 0) #define BPF_FIXUP_REG_MASK GENMASK(31, 27) +int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, + struct pt_regs *regs); int rv_bpf_fixup_exception(const struct exception_table_entry *ex, struct pt_regs *regs) {
Commit 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") only addressed RV64, and broke the RV32 build [1]. Fix by gating the exception tables code with CONFIG_ARCH_RV64I. Further, silence a "-Wmissing-prototypes" warning [2] in the RV64 BPF JIT. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202111020610.9oy9Rr0G-lkp@intel.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/llvm/202110290334.2zdMyRq4-lkp@intel.com/ Fixes: 252c765bd764 ("riscv, bpf: Add BPF exception tables") Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org> --- Tong/Daniel: The RV32 build has been broken since Thursday. I'll try to fast-track a bit, and commit a quick-fix for it. Hope that's OK with you, Tong! I've verified the build on my machine using riscv32 GCC 9.3.0 and riscv64 GCC 11.2.0. Björn --- arch/riscv/mm/extable.c | 4 ++-- arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp64.c | 2 ++ 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) base-commit: cc0356d6a02e064387c16a83cb96fe43ef33181e