On 9/5/2024 4:06 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
On Sat, Aug 31, 2024 at 12:57 AM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 8/31/2024 3:26 PM, Xu Kuohai wrote:
On 8/31/2024 12:19 PM, Pu Lehui 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)
#define PT_REGS_PARM1_CORE_SYSCALL(x) \
BPF_CORE_READ((const struct pt_regs___arm64 *)(x), __PT_PARM1_SYSCALL_REG)
Cool!
Acked-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@xxxxxxxxxx>
Wait, it breaks the following test:
You mean, *if you change the existing test like below*, it will break,
right? And that's expected, because arm64 has
ARCH_HAS_SYSCALL_WRAPPER, which means syscall pt_regs are actually not
the kprobe's ctx, so you can't directly access it. Which is why we
have PT_REGS_PARM1_CORE_SYSCALL() variants.
See how BPF_KSYSCALL macro is implemented, there are two cases:
___bpf_syswap_args(), which uses BPF_CORE_READ()-based macros to fetch
arguments, and ___bpf_syscall_args() which uses direct ctx reads.
Got it, thanks for the explanation.
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_syscall_macro.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_syscall_macro.c
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ int BPF_KPROBE(handle_sys_prctl)
/* test for PT_REGS_PARM */
- bpf_probe_read_kernel(&tmp, sizeof(tmp), &PT_REGS_PARM1_SYSCALL(real_regs));
+ tmp = PT_REGS_PARM1_SYSCALL(real_regs);
arg1 = tmp;
bpf_probe_read_kernel(&arg2, sizeof(arg2), &PT_REGS_PARM2_SYSCALL(real_regs));
bpf_probe_read_kernel(&arg3, sizeof(arg3), &PT_REGS_PARM3_SYSCALL(real_regs));
Failed with verifier rejection:
0: R1=ctx() R10=fp0
; int BPF_KPROBE(handle_sys_prctl) @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:33
0: (bf) r6 = r1 ; R1=ctx() R6_w=ctx()
; pid_t pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32; @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:36
1: (85) call bpf_get_current_pid_tgid#14 ; R0_w=scalar()
; if (pid != filter_pid) @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:39
2: (18) r1 = 0xffff800082e0e000 ; R1_w=map_value(map=bpf_sysc.rodata,ks=4,vs=4)
4: (61) r1 = *(u32 *)(r1 +0) ; R1_w=607
; pid_t pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32; @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:36
5: (77) r0 >>= 32 ; R0_w=scalar(smin=0,smax=umax=0xffffffff,var_off=(0x0; 0xffffffff))
; if (pid != filter_pid) @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:39
6: (5e) if w1 != w0 goto pc+98 ; R0_w=607 R1_w=607
; real_regs = PT_REGS_SYSCALL_REGS(ctx); @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:42
7: (79) r8 = *(u64 *)(r6 +0) ; R6_w=ctx() R8_w=scalar()
; tmp = PT_REGS_PARM1_SYSCALL(real_regs); @ bpf_syscall_macro.c:46
8: (79) r1 = *(u64 *)(r8 +272)
R8 invalid mem access 'scalar'
processed 8 insns (limit 1000000) max_states_per_insn 0 total_states 0 peak_states 0 mark_read 0
