Since LD_ABS/LD_IND instructions are now removed from the core and
reimplemented through a combination of inlined BPF instructions and
a slow-path helper, we can get rid of the complexity from ppc64 JIT.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Take advantage of stack_depth tracking, originally introduced for
x64, in powerpc JIT as well. Round up allocated stack by 16 bytes
to make sure it stays aligned for functions called from JITed bpf
program.
Signed-off-by: Sandipan Das <sandipan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Reviewed-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Tail calls allow JIT'ed eBPF programs to call into other JIT'ed eBPF
programs. This can be achieved either by:
(1) retaining the stack setup by the first eBPF program and having all
subsequent eBPF programs re-using it, or,
(2) by unwinding/tearing down the stack and having each eBPF program
deal with its own stack as it sees fit.
To ensure that this does not create loops, there is a limit to how many
tail calls can be done (currently 32). This requires the JIT'ed code to
maintain a count of the number of tail calls done so far.
Approach (1) is simple, but requires every eBPF program to have (almost)
the same prologue/epilogue, regardless of whether they need it. This is
inefficient for small eBPF programs which may not sometimes need a
prologue at all. As such, to minimize impact of tail call
implementation, we use approach (2) here which needs each eBPF program
in the chain to use its own prologue/epilogue. This is not ideal when
many tail calls are involved and when all the eBPF programs in the chain
have similar prologue/epilogue. However, the impact is restricted to
programs that do tail calls. Individual eBPF programs are not affected.
We maintain the tail call count in a fixed location on the stack and
updated tail call count values are passed in through this. The very
first eBPF program in a chain sets this up to 0 (the first 2
instructions). Subsequent tail calls skip the first two eBPF JIT
instructions to maintain the count. For programs that don't do tail
calls themselves, the first two instructions are NOPs.
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
While at it, ensure that the location of the local save area is
consistent whether or not we setup our own stackframe. This property is
utilised in the next patch that adds support for tail calls.
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
PPC64 eBPF JIT compiler.
Enable with:
echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
or
echo 2 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
... to see the generated JIT code. This can further be processed with
tools/net/bpf_jit_disasm.
With CONFIG_TEST_BPF=m and 'modprobe test_bpf':
test_bpf: Summary: 305 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [297/297 JIT'ed]
... on both ppc64 BE and LE.
The details of the approach are documented through various comments in
the code.
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Daniel Borkmann