Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/2] bpf, x64: Fix tailcall hierarchy

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 2024/2/22 16:52, Leon Hwang wrote:
From commit ebf7d1f508a73871 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall
handling in JIT"), the tailcall on x64 works better than before.

From commit e411901c0b775a3a ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms
for x64 JIT"), tailcall is able to run in BPF subprograms on x64.

How about:

1. More than 1 subprograms are called in a bpf program.
2. The tailcalls in the subprograms call the bpf program.

Because of missing tail_call_cnt back-propagation, a tailcall hierarchy
comes up. And MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT limit does not work for this case.

Let's take a look into an example:

\#include <linux/bpf.h>
\#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
\#include "bpf_legacy.h"

struct {
	__uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PROG_ARRAY);
	__uint(max_entries, 1);
	__uint(key_size, sizeof(__u32));
	__uint(value_size, sizeof(__u32));
} jmp_table SEC(".maps");

int count = 0;

static __noinline
int subprog_tail(struct __sk_buff *skb)
{
	bpf_tail_call_static(skb, &jmp_table, 0);
	return 0;
}

SEC("tc")
int entry(struct __sk_buff *skb)
{
	volatile int ret = 1;

	count++;
	subprog_tail(skb); /* subprog call1 */
	subprog_tail(skb); /* subprog call2 */

	return ret;
}

char __license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";

And the entry bpf prog is populated to the 0th slot of jmp_table. Then,
what happens when entry bpf prog runs? The CPU will be stalled because
of too many tailcalls, e.g. the test_progs failed to run on aarch64 and
s390x because of "rcu: INFO: rcu_sched self-detected stall on CPU".

So, if CPU does not stall because of too many tailcalls, how many
tailcalls will be there for this case? And why MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT limit
does not work for this case?

Let's step into some running steps.

At the very first time when subprog_tail() is called, subprog_tail() does
tailcall the entry bpf prog. Then, subprog_taill() is called at second time
at the position subprog call1, and it tailcalls the entry bpf prog again.

Then, again and again. At the very first time when MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT limit
works, subprog_tail() has been called for 34 times at the position subprog
call1. And at this time, the tail_call_cnt is 33 in subprog_tail().

Next, the 34th subprog_tail() returns to entry() because of
MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT limit.

In entry(), the 34th entry(), at the time after the 34th subprog_tail() at
the position subprog call1 finishes and before the 1st subprog_tail() at
the position subprog call2 calls in entry(), what's the value of
tail_call_cnt in entry()? It's 33.

As we know, tail_all_cnt is pushed on the stack of entry(), and propagates
to subprog_tail() by %rax from stack.

Then, at the time when subprog_tail() at the position subprog call2 is
called for its first time, tail_call_cnt 33 propagates to subprog_tail()
by %rax. And the tailcall in subprog_tail() is aborted because of
tail_call_cnt >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT too.

Then, subprog_tail() at the position subprog call2 ends, and the 34th
entry() ends. And it returns to the 33rd subprog_tail() called from the
position subprog call1. But wait, at this time, what's the value of
tail_call_cnt under the stack of subprog_tail()? It's 33.

Then, in the 33rd entry(), at the time after the 33th subprog_tail() at
the position subprog call1 finishes and before the 2nd subprog_tail() at
the position subprog call2 calls, what's the value of tail_call_cnt
in current entry()? It's *32*. Why not 33?

Before stepping into subprog_tail() at the position subprog call2 in 33rd
entry(), like stopping the time machine, let's have a look at the stack
memory:

   |  STACK  |
   +---------+ RBP  <-- current rbp
   |   ret   | STACK of 33rd entry()
   |   tcc   | its value is 32
   +---------+ RSP  <-- current rsp
   |   rip   | STACK of 34rd entry()
   |   rbp   | reuse the STACK of 33rd subprog_tail() at the position
   |   ret   |                                        subprog call1
   |   tcc   | its value is 33
   +---------+ rsp
   |   rip   | STACK of 1st subprog_tail() at the position subprog call2
   |   rbp   |
   |   tcc   | its value is 33
   +---------+ rsp

Why not 33? It's because tail_call_cnt does not back-propagate from
subprog_tail() to entry().

Then, while stepping into subprog_tail() at the position subprog call2 in
33rd entry():

   |  STACK  |
   +---------+
   |   ret   | STACK of 33rd entry()
   |   tcc   | its value is 32
   |   rip   |
   |   rbp   |
   +---------+ RBP  <-- current rbp
   |   tcc   | its value is 32; STACK of subprog_tail() at the position
   +---------+ RSP  <-- current rsp                        subprog call2

Then, while pausing after tailcalling in 2nd subprog_tail() at the position
subprog call2:

   |  STACK  |
   +---------+
   |   ret   | STACK of 33rd entry()
   |   tcc   | its value is 32
   |   rip   |
   |   rbp   |
   +---------+ RBP  <-- current rbp
   |   tcc   | its value is 33; STACK of subprog_tail() at the position
   +---------+ RSP  <-- current rsp                        subprog call2

Note: what happens to tail_call_cnt:
	/*
	 * if (tail_call_cnt++ >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT)
	 *	goto out;
	 */
It's to check >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT first and then increment tail_call_cnt.

So, current tailcall is allowed to run.

Then, entry() is tailcalled. And the stack memory status is:

   |  STACK  |
   +---------+
   |   ret   | STACK of 33rd entry()
   |   tcc   | its value is 32
   |   rip   |
   |   rbp   |
   +---------+ RBP  <-- current rbp
   |   ret   | STACK of 35th entry(); reuse STACK of subprog_tail() at the
   |   tcc   | its value is 33                   the position subprog call2
   +---------+ RSP  <-- current rsp

So, the tailcalls in the 35th entry() will be aborted.

And, ..., again and again.  :(

And, I hope you have understood the reason why MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT limit
does not work for this case.

And, how many tailcalls are there for this case if CPU does not stall?

From top-down view, does it look like hierarchy layer and layer?

I think it is a hierarchy layer model with 2+4+8+...+2**33 tailcalls. As a
result, if CPU does not stall, there will be 2**34 - 2 = 17,179,869,182
tailcalls. That's the guy making CPU stalled.

What about there are N subprog_tail() in entry()? If CPU does not stall
because of too many tailcalls, there will be almost N**34 tailcalls.

As we learn about the issue, how does this patch resolve it?

In this patch, it uses PERCPU tail_call_cnt to store the temporary
tail_call_cnt.

First, at the prologue of bpf prog, it initialise the PERCPU
tail_call_cnt by setting current CPU's tail_call_cnt to 0.

Then, when a tailcall happens, it fetches and increments current CPU's
tail_call_cnt, and compares to MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT.

Additionally, in order to avoid touching other registers excluding %rax,
it uses asm to handle PERCPU tail_call_cnt by %rax only.

As a result, the previous tailcall way can be removed totally, including

1. "push rax" at prologue.
2. load tail_call_cnt to rax before calling function.
3. "pop rax" before jumping to tailcallee when tailcall.
4. "push rax" and load tail_call_cnt to rax at trampoline.

Fixes: ebf7d1f508a7 ("bpf, x64: rework pro/epilogue and tailcall handling in JIT")
Fixes: e411901c0b77 ("bpf: allow for tailcalls in BPF subprograms for x64 JIT")
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@xxxxxxxxx>
---
  arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 128 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------
  1 file changed, 71 insertions(+), 57 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index e1390d1e331b5..3d1498a13b04c 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
  #include <asm/text-patching.h>
  #include <asm/unwind.h>
  #include <asm/cfi.h>
+#include <asm/percpu.h>
static bool all_callee_regs_used[4] = {true, true, true, true}; @@ -259,7 +260,7 @@ struct jit_context {
  /* Number of bytes emit_patch() needs to generate instructions */
  #define X86_PATCH_SIZE		5
  /* Number of bytes that will be skipped on tailcall */
-#define X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET	(11 + ENDBR_INSN_SIZE)
+#define X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET	(14 + ENDBR_INSN_SIZE)
static void push_r12(u8 **pprog)
  {
@@ -389,6 +390,9 @@ static void emit_cfi(u8 **pprog, u32 hash)
  	*pprog = prog;
  }
+static int emit_call(u8 **pprog, void *func, void *ip);
+static __used void bpf_tail_call_cnt_prepare(void);
+
  /*
   * Emit x86-64 prologue code for BPF program.
   * bpf_tail_call helper will skip the first X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET bytes
@@ -396,9 +400,9 @@ static void emit_cfi(u8 **pprog, u32 hash)
   */
  static void emit_prologue(u8 **pprog, u32 stack_depth, bool ebpf_from_cbpf,
  			  bool tail_call_reachable, bool is_subprog,
-			  bool is_exception_cb)
+			  bool is_exception_cb, u8 *ip)
  {
-	u8 *prog = *pprog;
+	u8 *prog = *pprog, *start = *pprog;
emit_cfi(&prog, is_subprog ? cfi_bpf_subprog_hash : cfi_bpf_hash);
  	/* BPF trampoline can be made to work without these nops,
@@ -407,13 +411,10 @@ static void emit_prologue(u8 **pprog, u32 stack_depth, bool ebpf_from_cbpf,
  	emit_nops(&prog, X86_PATCH_SIZE);
  	if (!ebpf_from_cbpf) {
  		if (tail_call_reachable && !is_subprog)
-			/* When it's the entry of the whole tailcall context,
-			 * zeroing rax means initialising tail_call_cnt.
-			 */
-			EMIT2(0x31, 0xC0); /* xor eax, eax */
+			emit_call(&prog, bpf_tail_call_cnt_prepare,
+				  ip + (prog - start));
  		else
-			/* Keep the same instruction layout. */
-			EMIT2(0x66, 0x90); /* nop2 */
+			emit_nops(&prog, X86_PATCH_SIZE);
  	}
  	/* Exception callback receives FP as third parameter */
  	if (is_exception_cb) {
@@ -438,8 +439,6 @@ static void emit_prologue(u8 **pprog, u32 stack_depth, bool ebpf_from_cbpf,
  	/* sub rsp, rounded_stack_depth */
  	if (stack_depth)
  		EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x81, 0xEC, round_up(stack_depth, 8));
-	if (tail_call_reachable)
-		EMIT1(0x50);         /* push rax */
  	*pprog = prog;
  }
@@ -575,6 +574,54 @@ static void emit_return(u8 **pprog, u8 *ip)
  	*pprog = prog;
  }
+DEFINE_PER_CPU(u32, bpf_tail_call_cnt);

Hi Leon, the solution is really simplifies complexity. If I understand correctly, this TAIL_CALL_CNT becomes the system global wise, not the prog global wise, but before it was limiting the TCC of entry prog.

+
+static __used void bpf_tail_call_cnt_prepare(void)
+{
+	/* The following asm equals to
+	 *
+	 * u32 *tcc_ptr = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_tail_call_cnt);
+	 *
+	 * *tcc_ptr = 0;
+	 *
+	 * This asm must uses %rax only.
+	 */
+
+	asm volatile (
+	     "addq " __percpu_arg(0) ", %1\n\t"
+	     "movl $0, (%%rax)\n\t"
+	     :
+	     : "m" (this_cpu_off), "r" (&bpf_tail_call_cnt)
+	);
+}
+
+static __used u32 bpf_tail_call_cnt_fetch_and_inc(void)
+{
+	u32 tail_call_cnt;
+
+	/* The following asm equals to
+	 *
+	 * u32 *tcc_ptr = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_tail_call_cnt);
+	 *
+	 * (*tcc_ptr)++;
+	 * tail_call_cnt = *tcc_ptr;
+	 * tail_call_cnt--;
+	 *
+	 * This asm must uses %rax only.
+	 */
+
+	asm volatile (
+	     "addq " __percpu_arg(1) ", %2\n\t"
+	     "incl (%%rax)\n\t"
+	     "movl (%%rax), %0\n\t"
+	     "decl %0\n\t"
+	     : "=r" (tail_call_cnt)
+	     : "m" (this_cpu_off), "r" (&bpf_tail_call_cnt)
+	);
+
+	return tail_call_cnt;
+}
+
  /*
   * Generate the following code:
   *
@@ -594,7 +641,6 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call_indirect(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
  					u32 stack_depth, u8 *ip,
  					struct jit_context *ctx)
  {
-	int tcc_off = -4 - round_up(stack_depth, 8);
  	u8 *prog = *pprog, *start = *pprog;
  	int offset;
@@ -615,17 +661,14 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call_indirect(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
  	offset = ctx->tail_call_indirect_label - (prog + 2 - start);
  	EMIT2(X86_JBE, offset);                   /* jbe out */
- /*
-	 * if (tail_call_cnt++ >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT)
+	/* if (bpf_tail_call_cnt_fetch_and_inc() >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT)
  	 *	goto out;
  	 */
-	EMIT2_off32(0x8B, 0x85, tcc_off);         /* mov eax, dword ptr [rbp - tcc_off] */
+	emit_call(&prog, bpf_tail_call_cnt_fetch_and_inc, ip + (prog - start));
  	EMIT3(0x83, 0xF8, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT);     /* cmp eax, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT */
offset = ctx->tail_call_indirect_label - (prog + 2 - start);
  	EMIT2(X86_JAE, offset);                   /* jae out */
-	EMIT3(0x83, 0xC0, 0x01);                  /* add eax, 1 */
-	EMIT2_off32(0x89, 0x85, tcc_off);         /* mov dword ptr [rbp - tcc_off], eax */
/* prog = array->ptrs[index]; */
  	EMIT4_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x8C, 0xD6,       /* mov rcx, [rsi + rdx * 8 + offsetof(...)] */
@@ -647,7 +690,6 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call_indirect(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
  		pop_callee_regs(&prog, callee_regs_used);
  	}
- EMIT1(0x58); /* pop rax */
  	if (stack_depth)
  		EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x81, 0xC4,     /* add rsp, sd */
  			    round_up(stack_depth, 8));
@@ -675,21 +717,17 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call_direct(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
  				      bool *callee_regs_used, u32 stack_depth,
  				      struct jit_context *ctx)
  {
-	int tcc_off = -4 - round_up(stack_depth, 8);
  	u8 *prog = *pprog, *start = *pprog;
  	int offset;
- /*
-	 * if (tail_call_cnt++ >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT)
+	/* if (bpf_tail_call_cnt_fetch_and_inc() >= MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT)
  	 *	goto out;
  	 */
-	EMIT2_off32(0x8B, 0x85, tcc_off);             /* mov eax, dword ptr [rbp - tcc_off] */
+	emit_call(&prog, bpf_tail_call_cnt_fetch_and_inc, ip);
  	EMIT3(0x83, 0xF8, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT);         /* cmp eax, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT */
offset = ctx->tail_call_direct_label - (prog + 2 - start);
  	EMIT2(X86_JAE, offset);                       /* jae out */
-	EMIT3(0x83, 0xC0, 0x01);                      /* add eax, 1 */
-	EMIT2_off32(0x89, 0x85, tcc_off);             /* mov dword ptr [rbp - tcc_off], eax */
poke->tailcall_bypass = ip + (prog - start);
  	poke->adj_off = X86_TAIL_CALL_OFFSET;
@@ -706,7 +744,6 @@ static void emit_bpf_tail_call_direct(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog,
  		pop_callee_regs(&prog, callee_regs_used);
  	}
- EMIT1(0x58); /* pop rax */
  	if (stack_depth)
  		EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x81, 0xC4, round_up(stack_depth, 8));
@@ -1133,10 +1170,6 @@ static void emit_shiftx(u8 **pprog, u32 dst_reg, u8 src_reg, bool is64, u8 op) #define INSN_SZ_DIFF (((addrs[i] - addrs[i - 1]) - (prog - temp))) -/* mov rax, qword ptr [rbp - rounded_stack_depth - 8] */
-#define RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack)				\
-	EMIT3_off32(0x48, 0x8B, 0x85, -round_up(stack, 8) - 8)
-
  static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image, u8 *rw_image,
  		  int oldproglen, struct jit_context *ctx, bool jmp_padding)
  {
@@ -1160,7 +1193,8 @@ static int do_jit(struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog, int *addrs, u8 *image, u8 *rw_image
emit_prologue(&prog, bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth,
  		      bpf_prog_was_classic(bpf_prog), tail_call_reachable,
-		      bpf_is_subprog(bpf_prog), bpf_prog->aux->exception_cb);
+		      bpf_is_subprog(bpf_prog), bpf_prog->aux->exception_cb,
+		      image);
  	/* Exception callback will clobber callee regs for its own use, and
  	 * restore the original callee regs from main prog's stack frame.
  	 */
@@ -1752,17 +1786,12 @@ st:			if (is_imm8(insn->off))
  		case BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL: {
  			int offs;
+ if (!imm32)
+				return -EINVAL;
+
  			func = (u8 *) __bpf_call_base + imm32;
-			if (tail_call_reachable) {
-				RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth);
-				if (!imm32)
-					return -EINVAL;
-				offs = 7 + x86_call_depth_emit_accounting(&prog, func);
-			} else {
-				if (!imm32)
-					return -EINVAL;
-				offs = x86_call_depth_emit_accounting(&prog, func);
-			}
+			offs = x86_call_depth_emit_accounting(&prog, func);
+
  			if (emit_call(&prog, func, image + addrs[i - 1] + offs))
  				return -EINVAL;
  			break;
@@ -2550,7 +2579,6 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
  	 *                     [ ...        ]
  	 *                     [ stack_arg2 ]
  	 * RBP - arg_stack_off [ stack_arg1 ]
-	 * RSP                 [ tail_call_cnt ] BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX
  	 */
/* room for return value of orig_call or fentry prog */
@@ -2622,8 +2650,6 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
  		/* sub rsp, stack_size */
  		EMIT4(0x48, 0x83, 0xEC, stack_size);
  	}
-	if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX)
-		EMIT1(0x50);		/* push rax */
  	/* mov QWORD PTR [rbp - rbx_off], rbx */
  	emit_stx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_FP, BPF_REG_6, -rbx_off);
@@ -2678,16 +2704,9 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
  		restore_regs(m, &prog, regs_off);
  		save_args(m, &prog, arg_stack_off, true);
- if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX) {
-			/* Before calling the original function, restore the
-			 * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
-			 */
-			RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
-		}
-
  		if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_ORIG_STACK) {
-			emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
-			EMIT2(0xff, 0xd3); /* call *rbx */
+			emit_ldx(&prog, BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_FP, 8);
+			EMIT2(0xff, 0xd0); /* call *rax */
  		} else {
  			/* call original function */
  			if (emit_rsb_call(&prog, orig_call, image + (prog - (u8 *)rw_image))) {
@@ -2740,11 +2759,6 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
  			ret = -EINVAL;
  			goto cleanup;
  		}
-	} else if (flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_TAIL_CALL_CTX) {
-		/* Before running the original function, restore the
-		 * tail_call_cnt from stack to rax.
-		 */
-		RESTORE_TAIL_CALL_CNT(stack_size);
  	}
/* restore return value of orig_call or fentry prog back into RAX */




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux