On Fri, Aug 30, 2024 at 9:17 PM Pu Lehui <pulehui@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Currently PT_REGS_PARM1 SYSCALL(x) is consistent with PT_REGS_PARM1_CORE
> SYSCALL(x), which will introduce the overhead of BPF_CORE_READ(), taking
> into account the read pt_regs comes directly from the context, let's use
> CO-RE direct read to access the first system call argument.
>
> Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h
> index e7d9382efeb3..051c408e6aed 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf_tracing.h
> @@ -222,7 +222,7 @@ struct pt_regs___s390 {
>
> struct pt_regs___arm64 {
> unsigned long orig_x0;
> -};
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
>
> /* arm64 provides struct user_pt_regs instead of struct pt_regs to userspace */
> #define __PT_REGS_CAST(x) ((const struct user_pt_regs *)(x))
> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ struct pt_regs___arm64 {
> #define __PT_PARM4_SYSCALL_REG __PT_PARM4_REG
> #define __PT_PARM5_SYSCALL_REG __PT_PARM5_REG
> #define __PT_PARM6_SYSCALL_REG __PT_PARM6_REG
> -#define PT_REGS_PARM1_SYSCALL(x) PT_REGS_PARM1_CORE_SYSCALL(x)
> +#define PT_REGS_PARM1_SYSCALL(x) (((const struct pt_regs___arm64 *)(x))->orig_x0)
It would probably be best (for consistency) to stick to using
__PTR_PARM1_SYSCALL_REG instead of hard-coding orig_x0 here, no? I'll
fix it up while applying. Same for patch #1 and #4.
It would be great if you can double-check that final patches in
bpf-next/master compile and work well for arm64, s390x, and RV64 (as I
can't really test that much locally).
> #define PT_REGS_PARM1_CORE_SYSCALL(x) \
> BPF_CORE_READ((const struct pt_regs___arm64 *)(x), __PT_PARM1_SYSCALL_REG)
>
> --
> 2.34.1
>
