On 7/22/22 11:34 AM, Dave Marchevsky wrote:
This patch adds a struct bpf_spin_lock *lock member to bpf_rbtree, as
well as a bpf_rbtree_get_lock helper which allows bpf programs to access
the lock.
Ideally the bpf_spin_lock would be created independently oustide of the
tree and associated with it before the tree is used, either as part of
map definition or via some call like rbtree_init(&rbtree, &lock). Doing
this in an ergonomic way is proving harder than expected, so for now use
this workaround.
Why is creating the bpf_spin_lock independently and associating it with
the tree preferable? Because we want to be able to transfer nodes
between trees atomically, and for this to work need same lock associated
with 2 trees.
Right. We need one lock to protect multiple rbtrees.
Since add/find/remove helpers will look into rbtree->lock
the two different rbtree (== map) have to point to the same lock.
Other than rbtree_init(&rbtree, &lock) what would be an alternative ?
Further locking-related patches will make it possible for the lock to be
used in BPF programs and add code which enforces that the lock is held
when doing any operation on the tree.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@xxxxxx>
---
include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 7 +++++++
kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 3 +++
kernel/bpf/rbtree.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++
tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 7 +++++++
4 files changed, 41 insertions(+)
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index 4688ce88caf4..c677d92de3bc 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -5385,6 +5385,12 @@ union bpf_attr {
* Return
* 0
*
+ * void *bpf_rbtree_get_lock(struct bpf_map *map)
+ * Description
+ * Return the bpf_spin_lock associated with the rbtree
+ *
+ * Return
+ * Ptr to lock
*/
#define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN) \
FN(unspec), \
@@ -5600,6 +5606,7 @@ union bpf_attr {
FN(rbtree_find), \
FN(rbtree_remove), \
FN(rbtree_free_node), \
+ FN(rbtree_get_lock), \
/* */
/* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 35eb66d11bf6..257a808bb767 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -1587,6 +1587,7 @@ const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_add_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_find_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_remove_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_free_node_proto __weak;
+const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto *
bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
@@ -1686,6 +1687,8 @@ bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
return &bpf_rbtree_remove_proto;
case BPF_FUNC_rbtree_free_node:
return &bpf_rbtree_free_node_proto;
+ case BPF_FUNC_rbtree_get_lock:
+ return &bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto;
default:
break;
}
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/rbtree.c b/kernel/bpf/rbtree.c
index 250d62210804..c6f0a2a083f6 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/rbtree.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/rbtree.c
@@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
struct bpf_rbtree {
struct bpf_map map;
struct rb_root_cached root;
+ struct bpf_spin_lock *lock;
};
BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_rbtree_btf_ids, struct, rb_node);
@@ -39,6 +40,14 @@ static struct bpf_map *rbtree_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
tree->root = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
bpf_map_init_from_attr(&tree->map, attr);
+
+ tree->lock = bpf_map_kzalloc(&tree->map, sizeof(struct bpf_spin_lock),
+ GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
+ if (!tree->lock) {
+ bpf_map_area_free(tree);
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+ }
+
return &tree->map;
}
@@ -139,6 +148,7 @@ static void rbtree_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
bpf_rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, &tree->root.rb_root)
kfree(pos);
+ kfree(tree->lock);
bpf_map_area_free(tree);
}
@@ -238,6 +248,20 @@ static int rbtree_map_get_next_key(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
+BPF_CALL_1(bpf_rbtree_get_lock, struct bpf_map *, map)
+{
+ struct bpf_rbtree *tree = container_of(map, struct bpf_rbtree, map);
+
+ return (u64)tree->lock;
+}
+
+const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto = {
+ .func = bpf_rbtree_get_lock,
+ .gpl_only = true,
+ .ret_type = RET_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE,
This hack and
+const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_unlock_proto = {
+ .func = bpf_rbtree_unlock,
+ .gpl_only = true,
+ .ret_type = RET_INTEGER,
+ .arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_SPIN_LOCK,
may be too much arm twisting to reuse bpf_spin_lock.
May be return ptr_to_btf_id here and bpf_rbtree_lock
should match the type?
It could be new 'struct bpf_lock' in kernel's BTF.
Let's figure out how to associate locks with rbtrees.
Reiterating my proposal that was done earlier in the context
of Delyan's irq_work, but for different type:
How about:
struct bpf_lock *l;
l = bpf_mem_alloc(allocator, bpf_core_type_id_kernel(*l));
that would allocate ptr_to_btf_id object from kernel's btf.
The bpf_lock would have constructor and destructor provided by the
kernel code.
constructor will set bpf_lock's refcnt to 1.
then bpf_rbtree_init(&map, lock) will bump the refcnt.
and dtor will eventually free it when all rbtrees are freed.
That would be similar to kptr's logic with kptr_get and dtor's
associated with kernel's btf_id-s.
