For R4000 erratas around multiplication and division instructions,
as our use of those instructions are always followed by mflo/mfhi
instructions, the only issue we need care is
"MIPS R4000PC/SC Errata, Processor Revision 2.2 and 3.0" Errata 28:
"A double-word or a variable shift may give an incorrect result if
executed while an integer multiplication is in progress."
We just emit a mfhi $0 to ensure the operation is completed after
every multiplication instruction according to workaround suggestion
in the document.
Signed-off-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Philippe Mathieu-Daudé <philmd@linaro.org>
Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230228113305.83751-3-jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com
MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT is 33, so min(MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT, 0xffff) is always
MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT, it is better to use MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT directly.
At the same time, add BUILD_BUG_ON(MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT > 0xffff) with a
comment on why the assertion is there.
Suggested-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Suggested-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/1661742309-2320-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn
In the current code, the actual max tail call count is 33 which is greater
than MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT (defined as 32). The actual limit is not consistent
with the meaning of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT and thus confusing at first glance.
We can see the historical evolution from commit 04fd61ab36 ("bpf: allow
bpf programs to tail-call other bpf programs") and commit f9dabe016b
("bpf: Undo off-by-one in interpreter tail call count limit"). In order
to avoid changing existing behavior, the actual limit is 33 now, this is
reasonable.
After commit 874be05f52 ("bpf, tests: Add tail call test suite"), we can
see there exists failed testcase.
On all archs when CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set:
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf
# dmesg | grep -w FAIL
Tail call error path, max count reached jited:0 ret 34 != 33 FAIL
On some archs:
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf
# dmesg | grep -w FAIL
Tail call error path, max count reached jited:1 ret 34 != 33 FAIL
Although the above failed testcase has been fixed in commit 18935a72eb
("bpf/tests: Fix error in tail call limit tests"), it would still be good
to change the value of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT from 32 to 33 to make the code
more readable.
The 32-bit x86 JIT was using a limit of 32, just fix the wrong comments and
limit to 33 tail calls as the constant MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT updated. For the
mips64 JIT, use "ori" instead of "addiu" as suggested by Johan Almbladh.
For the riscv JIT, use RV_REG_TCC directly to save one register move as
suggested by Björn Töpel. For the other implementations, no function changes,
it does not change the current limit 33, the new value of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT
can reflect the actual max tail call count, the related tail call testcases
in test_bpf module and selftests can work well for the interpreter and the
JIT.
Here are the test results on x86_64:
# uname -m
x86_64
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls
# dmesg | tail -1
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/8 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls
# dmesg | tail -1
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [8/8 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# ./test_progs -t tailcalls
#142 tailcalls:OK
Summary: 1/11 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Tested-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Acked-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/1636075800-3264-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn
This patch shaves off a few instructions when loading sparse 64-bit
constants to register. The change is covered by additional tests in
lib/test_bpf.c.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211007142828.634182-1-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
This patch adds workarounds for the following CPU errata to the MIPS
eBPF JIT, if enabled in the kernel configuration.
- R10000 ll/sc weak ordering
- Loongson-3 ll/sc weak ordering
- Loongson-2F jump hang
The Loongson-2F nop errata is implemented in uasm, which the JIT uses,
so no additional mitigations are needed for that.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Jiaxun Yang <jiaxun.yang@flygoat.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211005165408.2305108-6-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
This is an implementation on of an eBPF JIT for 64-bit MIPS III-V and
MIPS64r1-r6. It uses the same framework introduced by the 32-bit JIT.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211005165408.2305108-5-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
