linux-brain/arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c

1657 lines
39 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
/* BPF JIT compiler for RV64G
*
* Copyright(c) 2019 Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com>
*
*/
#include <linux/bpf.h>
#include <linux/filter.h>
#include <asm/cacheflush.h>
enum {
RV_REG_ZERO = 0, /* The constant value 0 */
RV_REG_RA = 1, /* Return address */
RV_REG_SP = 2, /* Stack pointer */
RV_REG_GP = 3, /* Global pointer */
RV_REG_TP = 4, /* Thread pointer */
RV_REG_T0 = 5, /* Temporaries */
RV_REG_T1 = 6,
RV_REG_T2 = 7,
RV_REG_FP = 8,
RV_REG_S1 = 9, /* Saved registers */
RV_REG_A0 = 10, /* Function argument/return values */
RV_REG_A1 = 11, /* Function arguments */
RV_REG_A2 = 12,
RV_REG_A3 = 13,
RV_REG_A4 = 14,
RV_REG_A5 = 15,
RV_REG_A6 = 16,
RV_REG_A7 = 17,
RV_REG_S2 = 18, /* Saved registers */
RV_REG_S3 = 19,
RV_REG_S4 = 20,
RV_REG_S5 = 21,
RV_REG_S6 = 22,
RV_REG_S7 = 23,
RV_REG_S8 = 24,
RV_REG_S9 = 25,
RV_REG_S10 = 26,
RV_REG_S11 = 27,
RV_REG_T3 = 28, /* Temporaries */
RV_REG_T4 = 29,
RV_REG_T5 = 30,
RV_REG_T6 = 31,
};
#define RV_REG_TCC RV_REG_A6
#define RV_REG_TCC_SAVED RV_REG_S6 /* Store A6 in S6 if program do calls */
static const int regmap[] = {
[BPF_REG_0] = RV_REG_A5,
[BPF_REG_1] = RV_REG_A0,
[BPF_REG_2] = RV_REG_A1,
[BPF_REG_3] = RV_REG_A2,
[BPF_REG_4] = RV_REG_A3,
[BPF_REG_5] = RV_REG_A4,
[BPF_REG_6] = RV_REG_S1,
[BPF_REG_7] = RV_REG_S2,
[BPF_REG_8] = RV_REG_S3,
[BPF_REG_9] = RV_REG_S4,
[BPF_REG_FP] = RV_REG_S5,
[BPF_REG_AX] = RV_REG_T0,
};
enum {
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_TAIL_CALL = 0,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_CALL = RV_REG_RA,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S1 = RV_REG_S1,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S2 = RV_REG_S2,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S3 = RV_REG_S3,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S4 = RV_REG_S4,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S5 = RV_REG_S5,
RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S6 = RV_REG_S6,
};
struct rv_jit_context {
struct bpf_prog *prog;
u32 *insns; /* RV insns */
int ninsns;
int epilogue_offset;
int *offset; /* BPF to RV */
unsigned long flags;
int stack_size;
};
struct rv_jit_data {
struct bpf_binary_header *header;
u8 *image;
struct rv_jit_context ctx;
};
static u8 bpf_to_rv_reg(int bpf_reg, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
u8 reg = regmap[bpf_reg];
switch (reg) {
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S1:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S2:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S3:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S4:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S5:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S6:
__set_bit(reg, &ctx->flags);
}
return reg;
};
static bool seen_reg(int reg, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
switch (reg) {
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_CALL:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S1:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S2:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S3:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S4:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S5:
case RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S6:
return test_bit(reg, &ctx->flags);
}
return false;
}
static void mark_fp(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
__set_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S5, &ctx->flags);
}
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
static void mark_call(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
__set_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_CALL, &ctx->flags);
}
static bool seen_call(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
return test_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_CALL, &ctx->flags);
}
static void mark_tail_call(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
__set_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_TAIL_CALL, &ctx->flags);
}
static bool seen_tail_call(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
return test_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_TAIL_CALL, &ctx->flags);
}
static u8 rv_tail_call_reg(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
mark_tail_call(ctx);
if (seen_call(ctx)) {
__set_bit(RV_CTX_F_SEEN_S6, &ctx->flags);
return RV_REG_S6;
}
return RV_REG_A6;
}
static void emit(const u32 insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
if (ctx->insns)
ctx->insns[ctx->ninsns] = insn;
ctx->ninsns++;
}
static u32 rv_r_insn(u8 funct7, u8 rs2, u8 rs1, u8 funct3, u8 rd, u8 opcode)
{
return (funct7 << 25) | (rs2 << 20) | (rs1 << 15) | (funct3 << 12) |
(rd << 7) | opcode;
}
static u32 rv_i_insn(u16 imm11_0, u8 rs1, u8 funct3, u8 rd, u8 opcode)
{
return (imm11_0 << 20) | (rs1 << 15) | (funct3 << 12) | (rd << 7) |
opcode;
}
static u32 rv_s_insn(u16 imm11_0, u8 rs2, u8 rs1, u8 funct3, u8 opcode)
{
u8 imm11_5 = imm11_0 >> 5, imm4_0 = imm11_0 & 0x1f;
return (imm11_5 << 25) | (rs2 << 20) | (rs1 << 15) | (funct3 << 12) |
(imm4_0 << 7) | opcode;
}
static u32 rv_sb_insn(u16 imm12_1, u8 rs2, u8 rs1, u8 funct3, u8 opcode)
{
u8 imm12 = ((imm12_1 & 0x800) >> 5) | ((imm12_1 & 0x3f0) >> 4);
u8 imm4_1 = ((imm12_1 & 0xf) << 1) | ((imm12_1 & 0x400) >> 10);
return (imm12 << 25) | (rs2 << 20) | (rs1 << 15) | (funct3 << 12) |
(imm4_1 << 7) | opcode;
}
static u32 rv_u_insn(u32 imm31_12, u8 rd, u8 opcode)
{
return (imm31_12 << 12) | (rd << 7) | opcode;
}
static u32 rv_uj_insn(u32 imm20_1, u8 rd, u8 opcode)
{
u32 imm;
imm = (imm20_1 & 0x80000) | ((imm20_1 & 0x3ff) << 9) |
((imm20_1 & 0x400) >> 2) | ((imm20_1 & 0x7f800) >> 11);
return (imm << 12) | (rd << 7) | opcode;
}
static u32 rv_amo_insn(u8 funct5, u8 aq, u8 rl, u8 rs2, u8 rs1,
u8 funct3, u8 rd, u8 opcode)
{
u8 funct7 = (funct5 << 2) | (aq << 1) | rl;
return rv_r_insn(funct7, rs2, rs1, funct3, rd, opcode);
}
static u32 rv_addiw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 0, rd, 0x1b);
}
static u32 rv_addi(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 0, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_addw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_add(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_subw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0x20, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_sub(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0x20, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_and(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 7, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_or(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 6, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_xor(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 4, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_mulw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_mul(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 0, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_divuw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_divu(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_remuw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 7, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_remu(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(1, rs2, rs1, 7, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_sllw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 1, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_sll(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 1, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_srlw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_srl(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_sraw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0x20, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x3b);
}
static u32 rv_sra(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_r_insn(0x20, rs2, rs1, 5, rd, 0x33);
}
static u32 rv_lui(u8 rd, u32 imm31_12)
{
return rv_u_insn(imm31_12, rd, 0x37);
}
static u32 rv_slli(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 1, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_andi(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 7, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_ori(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 6, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_xori(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 4, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_slliw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 1, rd, 0x1b);
}
static u32 rv_srliw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 5, rd, 0x1b);
}
static u32 rv_srli(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 5, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_sraiw(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(0x400 | imm11_0, rs1, 5, rd, 0x1b);
}
static u32 rv_srai(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(0x400 | imm11_0, rs1, 5, rd, 0x13);
}
static u32 rv_jal(u8 rd, u32 imm20_1)
{
return rv_uj_insn(imm20_1, rd, 0x6f);
}
static u32 rv_jalr(u8 rd, u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 0, rd, 0x67);
}
static u32 rv_beq(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 0, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_bltu(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 6, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_bgeu(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 7, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_bne(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 1, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_blt(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 4, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_bge(u8 rs1, u8 rs2, u16 imm12_1)
{
return rv_sb_insn(imm12_1, rs2, rs1, 5, 0x63);
}
static u32 rv_sb(u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_s_insn(imm11_0, rs2, rs1, 0, 0x23);
}
static u32 rv_sh(u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_s_insn(imm11_0, rs2, rs1, 1, 0x23);
}
static u32 rv_sw(u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_s_insn(imm11_0, rs2, rs1, 2, 0x23);
}
static u32 rv_sd(u8 rs1, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs2)
{
return rv_s_insn(imm11_0, rs2, rs1, 3, 0x23);
}
static u32 rv_lbu(u8 rd, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs1)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 4, rd, 0x03);
}
static u32 rv_lhu(u8 rd, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs1)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 5, rd, 0x03);
}
static u32 rv_lwu(u8 rd, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs1)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 6, rd, 0x03);
}
static u32 rv_ld(u8 rd, u16 imm11_0, u8 rs1)
{
return rv_i_insn(imm11_0, rs1, 3, rd, 0x03);
}
static u32 rv_amoadd_w(u8 rd, u8 rs2, u8 rs1, u8 aq, u8 rl)
{
return rv_amo_insn(0, aq, rl, rs2, rs1, 2, rd, 0x2f);
}
static u32 rv_amoadd_d(u8 rd, u8 rs2, u8 rs1, u8 aq, u8 rl)
{
return rv_amo_insn(0, aq, rl, rs2, rs1, 3, rd, 0x2f);
}
static bool is_12b_int(s64 val)
{
return -(1 << 11) <= val && val < (1 << 11);
}
static bool is_13b_int(s64 val)
{
return -(1 << 12) <= val && val < (1 << 12);
}
static bool is_21b_int(s64 val)
{
return -(1L << 20) <= val && val < (1L << 20);
}
static bool is_32b_int(s64 val)
{
return -(1L << 31) <= val && val < (1L << 31);
}
static int is_12b_check(int off, int insn)
{
if (!is_12b_int(off)) {
pr_err("bpf-jit: insn=%d offset=%d not supported yet!\n",
insn, (int)off);
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
static int is_13b_check(int off, int insn)
{
if (!is_13b_int(off)) {
pr_err("bpf-jit: insn=%d offset=%d not supported yet!\n",
insn, (int)off);
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
static int is_21b_check(int off, int insn)
{
if (!is_21b_int(off)) {
pr_err("bpf-jit: insn=%d offset=%d not supported yet!\n",
insn, (int)off);
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
static void emit_imm(u8 rd, s64 val, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
/* Note that the immediate from the add is sign-extended,
* which means that we need to compensate this by adding 2^12,
* when the 12th bit is set. A simpler way of doing this, and
* getting rid of the check, is to just add 2**11 before the
* shift. The "Loading a 32-Bit constant" example from the
* "Computer Organization and Design, RISC-V edition" book by
* Patterson/Hennessy highlights this fact.
*
* This also means that we need to process LSB to MSB.
*/
s64 upper = (val + (1 << 11)) >> 12, lower = val & 0xfff;
int shift;
if (is_32b_int(val)) {
if (upper)
emit(rv_lui(rd, upper), ctx);
if (!upper) {
emit(rv_addi(rd, RV_REG_ZERO, lower), ctx);
return;
}
emit(rv_addiw(rd, rd, lower), ctx);
return;
}
shift = __ffs(upper);
upper >>= shift;
shift += 12;
emit_imm(rd, upper, ctx);
emit(rv_slli(rd, rd, shift), ctx);
if (lower)
emit(rv_addi(rd, rd, lower), ctx);
}
static int rv_offset(int bpf_to, int bpf_from, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
int from = ctx->offset[bpf_from] - 1, to = ctx->offset[bpf_to];
return (to - from) << 2;
}
static int epilogue_offset(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
int to = ctx->epilogue_offset, from = ctx->ninsns;
return (to - from) << 2;
}
static void __build_epilogue(u8 reg, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
int stack_adjust = ctx->stack_size, store_offset = stack_adjust - 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_RA, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_RA, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_FP, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S1, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S1, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S2, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S2, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S3, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S3, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S4, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S4, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S5, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S5, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S6, ctx)) {
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_S6, store_offset, RV_REG_SP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_SP, RV_REG_SP, stack_adjust), ctx);
/* Set return value. */
if (reg == RV_REG_RA)
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_A0, RV_REG_A5, 0), ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit(rv_jalr(RV_REG_ZERO, reg, 0), ctx);
}
static void emit_zext_32(u8 reg, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
emit(rv_slli(reg, reg, 32), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(reg, reg, 32), ctx);
}
static int emit_bpf_tail_call(int insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
int tc_ninsn, off, start_insn = ctx->ninsns;
u8 tcc = rv_tail_call_reg(ctx);
/* a0: &ctx
* a1: &array
* a2: index
*
* if (index >= array->map.max_entries)
* goto out;
*/
tc_ninsn = insn ? ctx->offset[insn] - ctx->offset[insn - 1] :
ctx->offset[0];
emit_zext_32(RV_REG_A2, ctx);
off = offsetof(struct bpf_array, map.max_entries);
if (is_12b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_lwu(RV_REG_T1, off, RV_REG_A1), ctx);
off = (tc_ninsn - (ctx->ninsns - start_insn)) << 2;
if (is_13b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_bgeu(RV_REG_A2, RV_REG_T1, off >> 1), ctx);
/* if (TCC-- < 0)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
* goto out;
*/
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T1, tcc, -1), ctx);
off = (tc_ninsn - (ctx->ninsns - start_insn)) << 2;
if (is_13b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_blt(tcc, RV_REG_ZERO, off >> 1), ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
/* prog = array->ptrs[index];
* if (!prog)
* goto out;
*/
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_A2, 3), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_A1), ctx);
off = offsetof(struct bpf_array, ptrs);
if (is_12b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_T2, off, RV_REG_T2), ctx);
off = (tc_ninsn - (ctx->ninsns - start_insn)) << 2;
if (is_13b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_beq(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_ZERO, off >> 1), ctx);
/* goto *(prog->bpf_func + 4); */
off = offsetof(struct bpf_prog, bpf_func);
if (is_12b_check(off, insn))
return -1;
emit(rv_ld(RV_REG_T3, off, RV_REG_T2), ctx);
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T3, RV_REG_T3, 4), ctx);
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_TCC, RV_REG_T1, 0), ctx);
__build_epilogue(RV_REG_T3, ctx);
return 0;
}
static void init_regs(u8 *rd, u8 *rs, const struct bpf_insn *insn,
struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
u8 code = insn->code;
switch (code) {
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JA:
case BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL:
case BPF_JMP | BPF_EXIT:
case BPF_JMP | BPF_TAIL_CALL:
break;
default:
*rd = bpf_to_rv_reg(insn->dst_reg, ctx);
}
if (code & (BPF_ALU | BPF_X) || code & (BPF_ALU64 | BPF_X) ||
code & (BPF_JMP | BPF_X) || code & (BPF_JMP32 | BPF_X) ||
code & BPF_LDX || code & BPF_STX)
*rs = bpf_to_rv_reg(insn->src_reg, ctx);
}
static int rv_offset_check(int *rvoff, s16 off, int insn,
struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
*rvoff = rv_offset(insn + off, insn, ctx);
return is_13b_check(*rvoff, insn);
}
static void emit_zext_32_rd_rs(u8 *rd, u8 *rs, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T2, *rd, 0), ctx);
emit_zext_32(RV_REG_T2, ctx);
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T1, *rs, 0), ctx);
emit_zext_32(RV_REG_T1, ctx);
*rd = RV_REG_T2;
*rs = RV_REG_T1;
}
static void emit_sext_32_rd_rs(u8 *rd, u8 *rs, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
emit(rv_addiw(RV_REG_T2, *rd, 0), ctx);
emit(rv_addiw(RV_REG_T1, *rs, 0), ctx);
*rd = RV_REG_T2;
*rs = RV_REG_T1;
}
static void emit_zext_32_rd_t1(u8 *rd, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T2, *rd, 0), ctx);
emit_zext_32(RV_REG_T2, ctx);
emit_zext_32(RV_REG_T1, ctx);
*rd = RV_REG_T2;
}
static void emit_sext_32_rd(u8 *rd, struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
emit(rv_addiw(RV_REG_T2, *rd, 0), ctx);
*rd = RV_REG_T2;
}
static int emit_insn(const struct bpf_insn *insn, struct rv_jit_context *ctx,
bool extra_pass)
{
bool is64 = BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_ALU64 ||
BPF_CLASS(insn->code) == BPF_JMP;
struct bpf_prog_aux *aux = ctx->prog->aux;
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
int rvoff, i = insn - ctx->prog->insnsi;
u8 rd = -1, rs = -1, code = insn->code;
s16 off = insn->off;
s32 imm = insn->imm;
init_regs(&rd, &rs, insn, ctx);
switch (code) {
/* dst = src */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOV | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOV | BPF_X:
if (imm == 1) {
/* Special mov32 for zext */
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
}
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit(is64 ? rv_addi(rd, rs, 0) : rv_addiw(rd, rs, 0), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst OP src */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_ADD | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ADD | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_add(rd, rd, rs) : rv_addw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_SUB | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_SUB | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_sub(rd, rd, rs) : rv_subw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_AND | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_AND | BPF_X:
emit(rv_and(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_OR | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_OR | BPF_X:
emit(rv_or(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_XOR | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_XOR | BPF_X:
emit(rv_xor(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MUL | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MUL | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_mul(rd, rd, rs) : rv_mulw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_divu(rd, rd, rs) : rv_divuw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_remu(rd, rd, rs) : rv_remuw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_sll(rd, rd, rs) : rv_sllw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_srl(rd, rd, rs) : rv_srlw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_X:
emit(is64 ? rv_sra(rd, rd, rs) : rv_sraw(rd, rd, rs), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
/* dst = -dst */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_NEG:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_NEG:
emit(is64 ? rv_sub(rd, RV_REG_ZERO, rd) :
rv_subw(rd, RV_REG_ZERO, rd), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
/* dst = BSWAP##imm(dst) */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_END | BPF_FROM_LE:
{
int shift = 64 - imm;
emit(rv_slli(rd, rd, shift), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, shift), ctx);
break;
}
case BPF_ALU | BPF_END | BPF_FROM_BE:
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_ZERO, 0), ctx);
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
if (imm == 16)
goto out_be;
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
if (imm == 32)
goto out_be;
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_slli(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, 8), ctx);
emit(rv_srli(rd, rd, 8), ctx);
out_be:
emit(rv_andi(RV_REG_T1, rd, 0xff), ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_addi(rd, RV_REG_T2, 0), ctx);
break;
/* dst = imm */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOV | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOV | BPF_K:
emit_imm(rd, imm, ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
/* dst = dst OP imm */
case BPF_ALU | BPF_ADD | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ADD | BPF_K:
if (is_12b_int(imm)) {
emit(is64 ? rv_addi(rd, rd, imm) :
rv_addiw(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(is64 ? rv_add(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1) :
rv_addw(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
}
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_SUB | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_SUB | BPF_K:
if (is_12b_int(-imm)) {
emit(is64 ? rv_addi(rd, rd, -imm) :
rv_addiw(rd, rd, -imm), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(is64 ? rv_sub(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1) :
rv_subw(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
}
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_AND | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_AND | BPF_K:
if (is_12b_int(imm)) {
emit(rv_andi(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(rv_and(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
}
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_OR | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_OR | BPF_K:
if (is_12b_int(imm)) {
emit(rv_ori(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(rv_or(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
}
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_XOR | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_XOR | BPF_K:
if (is_12b_int(imm)) {
emit(rv_xori(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(rv_xor(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
}
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MUL | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MUL | BPF_K:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(is64 ? rv_mul(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1) :
rv_mulw(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_DIV | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_K:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(is64 ? rv_divu(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1) :
rv_divuw(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
emit(is64 ? rv_remu(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1) :
rv_remuw(rd, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (!is64 && !aux->verifier_zext)
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_LSH | BPF_K:
emit(is64 ? rv_slli(rd, rd, imm) : rv_slliw(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_RSH | BPF_K:
emit(is64 ? rv_srli(rd, rd, imm) : rv_srliw(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_K:
case BPF_ALU64 | BPF_ARSH | BPF_K:
emit(is64 ? rv_srai(rd, rd, imm) : rv_sraiw(rd, rd, imm), ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32(rd, ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
/* JUMP off */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JA:
rvoff = rv_offset(i + off, i, ctx);
if (!is_21b_int(rvoff)) {
pr_err("bpf-jit: insn=%d offset=%d not supported yet!\n",
i, rvoff);
return -1;
}
emit(rv_jal(RV_REG_ZERO, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
/* IF (dst COND src) JUMP off */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JEQ | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_beq(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGT | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JGT | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bltu(rs, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLT | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JLT | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bltu(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGE | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JGE | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bgeu(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLE | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JLE | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bgeu(rs, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JNE | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bne(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGT | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSGT | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_blt(rs, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLT | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSLT | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_blt(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGE | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSGE | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bge(rd, rs, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLE | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSLE | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_bge(rs, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_X:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSET | BPF_X:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_rs(&rd, &rs, ctx);
emit(rv_and(RV_REG_T1, rd, rs), ctx);
emit(rv_bne(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_ZERO, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
/* IF (dst COND imm) JUMP off */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_beq(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGT | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JGT | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bltu(RV_REG_T1, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLT | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JLT | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bltu(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGE | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JGE | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bgeu(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLE | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JLE | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bgeu(RV_REG_T1, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JNE | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bne(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGT | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSGT | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_blt(RV_REG_T1, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLT | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSLT | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_blt(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGE | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSGE | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bge(rd, RV_REG_T1, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLE | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSLE | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_sext_32_rd(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_bge(RV_REG_T1, rd, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_K:
case BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JSET | BPF_K:
if (rv_offset_check(&rvoff, off, i, ctx))
return -1;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (!is64)
emit_zext_32_rd_t1(&rd, ctx);
emit(rv_and(RV_REG_T1, rd, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
emit(rv_bne(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_ZERO, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
/* function call */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL:
{
bool fixed;
int i, ret;
u64 addr;
mark_call(ctx);
ret = bpf_jit_get_func_addr(ctx->prog, insn, extra_pass, &addr,
&fixed);
if (ret < 0)
return ret;
if (fixed) {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, addr, ctx);
} else {
i = ctx->ninsns;
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, addr, ctx);
for (i = ctx->ninsns - i; i < 8; i++) {
/* nop */
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_ZERO, RV_REG_ZERO, 0),
ctx);
}
}
emit(rv_jalr(RV_REG_RA, RV_REG_T1, 0), ctx);
rd = bpf_to_rv_reg(BPF_REG_0, ctx);
emit(rv_addi(rd, RV_REG_A0, 0), ctx);
break;
}
/* tail call */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_TAIL_CALL:
if (emit_bpf_tail_call(i, ctx))
return -1;
break;
/* function return */
case BPF_JMP | BPF_EXIT:
if (i == ctx->prog->len - 1)
break;
rvoff = epilogue_offset(ctx);
if (is_21b_check(rvoff, i))
return -1;
emit(rv_jal(RV_REG_ZERO, rvoff >> 1), ctx);
break;
/* dst = imm64 */
case BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW:
{
struct bpf_insn insn1 = insn[1];
u64 imm64;
imm64 = (u64)insn1.imm << 32 | (u32)imm;
emit_imm(rd, imm64, ctx);
return 1;
}
/* LDX: dst = *(size *)(src + off) */
case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_B:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_lbu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs), ctx);
emit(rv_lbu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
return 1;
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_lhu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs), ctx);
emit(rv_lhu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
return 1;
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_lwu(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs), ctx);
emit(rv_lwu(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
if (insn_is_zext(&insn[1]))
return 1;
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
break;
case BPF_LDX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_ld(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rs), ctx);
emit(rv_ld(rd, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
bpf: Introduce BPF nospec instruction for mitigating Spectre v4 commit f5e81d1117501546b7be050c5fbafa6efd2c722c upstream. In case of JITs, each of the JIT backends compiles the BPF nospec instruction /either/ to a machine instruction which emits a speculation barrier /or/ to /no/ machine instruction in case the underlying architecture is not affected by Speculative Store Bypass or has different mitigations in place already. This covers both x86 and (implicitly) arm64: In case of x86, we use 'lfence' instruction for mitigation. In case of arm64, we rely on the firmware mitigation as controlled via the ssbd kernel parameter. Whenever the mitigation is enabled, it works for all of the kernel code with no need to provide any additional instructions here (hence only comment in arm64 JIT). Other archs can follow as needed. The BPF nospec instruction is specifically targeting Spectre v4 since i) we don't use a serialization barrier for the Spectre v1 case, and ii) mitigation instructions for v1 and v4 might be different on some archs. The BPF nospec is required for a future commit, where the BPF verifier does annotate intermediate BPF programs with speculation barriers. Co-developed-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com> Co-developed-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Piotr Krysiuk <piotras@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Benedict Schlueter <benedict.schlueter@rub.de> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> [OP: - adjusted context for 5.4 - apply riscv changes to /arch/riscv/net/bpf_jit_comp.c] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait <ovidiu.panait@windriver.com> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
2021-09-07 22:16:58 +09:00
/* speculation barrier */
case BPF_ST | BPF_NOSPEC:
break;
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
/* ST: *(size *)(dst + off) = imm */
case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_B:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sb(rd, off, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T2, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sb(RV_REG_T2, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_H:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sh(rd, off, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T2, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sh(RV_REG_T2, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_W:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sw(rd, off, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T2, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sw(RV_REG_T2, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
case BPF_ST | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW:
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, imm, ctx);
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sd(rd, off, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T2, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T2, RV_REG_T2, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_T2, 0, RV_REG_T1), ctx);
break;
/* STX: *(size *)(dst + off) = src */
case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_B:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sb(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sb(RV_REG_T1, 0, rs), ctx);
break;
case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_H:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sh(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sh(RV_REG_T1, 0, rs), ctx);
break;
case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_W:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sw(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sw(RV_REG_T1, 0, rs), ctx);
break;
case BPF_STX | BPF_MEM | BPF_DW:
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_sd(rd, off, rs), ctx);
break;
}
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rd), ctx);
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_T1, 0, rs), ctx);
break;
/* STX XADD: lock *(u32 *)(dst + off) += src */
case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_W:
/* STX XADD: lock *(u64 *)(dst + off) += src */
case BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_DW:
if (off) {
if (is_12b_int(off)) {
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_T1, rd, off), ctx);
} else {
emit_imm(RV_REG_T1, off, ctx);
emit(rv_add(RV_REG_T1, RV_REG_T1, rd), ctx);
}
rd = RV_REG_T1;
}
emit(BPF_SIZE(code) == BPF_W ?
rv_amoadd_w(RV_REG_ZERO, rs, rd, 0, 0) :
rv_amoadd_d(RV_REG_ZERO, rs, rd, 0, 0), ctx);
break;
default:
pr_err("bpf-jit: unknown opcode %02x\n", code);
return -EINVAL;
}
return 0;
}
static void build_prologue(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
int stack_adjust = 0, store_offset, bpf_stack_adjust;
bpf_stack_adjust = round_up(ctx->prog->aux->stack_depth, 16);
if (bpf_stack_adjust)
mark_fp(ctx);
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_RA, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
stack_adjust += 8; /* RV_REG_FP */
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S1, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S2, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S3, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S4, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S5, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S6, ctx))
stack_adjust += 8;
stack_adjust = round_up(stack_adjust, 16);
stack_adjust += bpf_stack_adjust;
store_offset = stack_adjust - 8;
/* First instruction is always setting the tail-call-counter
* (TCC) register. This instruction is skipped for tail calls.
*/
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_TCC, RV_REG_ZERO, MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT), ctx);
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_SP, RV_REG_SP, -stack_adjust), ctx);
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_RA, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_RA), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_FP), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S1, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S1), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S2, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S2), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S3, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S3), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S4, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S4), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S5, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S5), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
if (seen_reg(RV_REG_S6, ctx)) {
emit(rv_sd(RV_REG_SP, store_offset, RV_REG_S6), ctx);
store_offset -= 8;
}
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_FP, RV_REG_SP, stack_adjust), ctx);
if (bpf_stack_adjust)
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_S5, RV_REG_SP, bpf_stack_adjust), ctx);
/* Program contains calls and tail calls, so RV_REG_TCC need
* to be saved across calls.
*/
if (seen_tail_call(ctx) && seen_call(ctx))
emit(rv_addi(RV_REG_TCC_SAVED, RV_REG_TCC, 0), ctx);
ctx->stack_size = stack_adjust;
}
static void build_epilogue(struct rv_jit_context *ctx)
{
__build_epilogue(RV_REG_RA, ctx);
}
static int build_body(struct rv_jit_context *ctx, bool extra_pass)
{
const struct bpf_prog *prog = ctx->prog;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < prog->len; i++) {
const struct bpf_insn *insn = &prog->insnsi[i];
int ret;
ret = emit_insn(insn, ctx, extra_pass);
if (ret > 0) {
i++;
if (ctx->insns == NULL)
ctx->offset[i] = ctx->ninsns;
continue;
}
if (ctx->insns == NULL)
ctx->offset[i] = ctx->ninsns;
if (ret)
return ret;
}
return 0;
}
static void bpf_fill_ill_insns(void *area, unsigned int size)
{
memset(area, 0, size);
}
static void bpf_flush_icache(void *start, void *end)
{
flush_icache_range((unsigned long)start, (unsigned long)end);
}
bool bpf_jit_needs_zext(void)
{
return true;
}
bpf, riscv: add BPF JIT for RV64G This commit adds a BPF JIT for RV64G. The JIT is a two-pass JIT, and has a dynamic prolog/epilogue (similar to the MIPS64 BPF JIT) instead of static ones (e.g. x86_64). At the moment the RISC-V Linux port does not support CONFIG_HAVE_KPROBES, which means that CONFIG_BPF_EVENTS is not supported. Thus, no tests involving BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE and BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT passes. The implementation does not support "far branching" (>4KiB). Test results: # modprobe test_bpf test_bpf: Summary: 378 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [366/366 JIT'ed] # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier ... Summary: 761 PASSED, 507 SKIPPED, 2 FAILED Note that "test_verifier" was run with one build with CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y and one without, otherwise many of the the tests that require unaligned access were skipped. CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS=y: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 0 No CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS: # echo 1 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled # ./test_verifier | grep -c 'NOTE.*unknown align' 59 The two failing test_verifier tests are: "ld_abs: vlan + abs, test 1" "ld_abs: jump around ld_abs" This is due to that "far branching" involved in those tests. All tests where done on QEMU (QEMU emulator version 3.1.50 (v3.1.0-688-g8ae951fbc106)). Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
2019-02-05 21:41:22 +09:00
struct bpf_prog *bpf_int_jit_compile(struct bpf_prog *prog)
{
bool tmp_blinded = false, extra_pass = false;
struct bpf_prog *tmp, *orig_prog = prog;
struct rv_jit_data *jit_data;
struct rv_jit_context *ctx;
unsigned int image_size;
if (!prog->jit_requested)
return orig_prog;
tmp = bpf_jit_blind_constants(prog);
if (IS_ERR(tmp))
return orig_prog;
if (tmp != prog) {
tmp_blinded = true;
prog = tmp;
}
jit_data = prog->aux->jit_data;
if (!jit_data) {
jit_data = kzalloc(sizeof(*jit_data), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!jit_data) {
prog = orig_prog;
goto out;
}
prog->aux->jit_data = jit_data;
}
ctx = &jit_data->ctx;
if (ctx->offset) {
extra_pass = true;
image_size = sizeof(u32) * ctx->ninsns;
goto skip_init_ctx;
}
ctx->prog = prog;
ctx->offset = kcalloc(prog->len, sizeof(int), GFP_KERNEL);
if (!ctx->offset) {
prog = orig_prog;
goto out_offset;
}
/* First pass generates the ctx->offset, but does not emit an image. */
if (build_body(ctx, extra_pass)) {
prog = orig_prog;
goto out_offset;
}
build_prologue(ctx);
ctx->epilogue_offset = ctx->ninsns;
build_epilogue(ctx);
/* Allocate image, now that we know the size. */
image_size = sizeof(u32) * ctx->ninsns;
jit_data->header = bpf_jit_binary_alloc(image_size, &jit_data->image,
sizeof(u32),
bpf_fill_ill_insns);
if (!jit_data->header) {
prog = orig_prog;
goto out_offset;
}
/* Second, real pass, that acutally emits the image. */
ctx->insns = (u32 *)jit_data->image;
skip_init_ctx:
ctx->ninsns = 0;
build_prologue(ctx);
if (build_body(ctx, extra_pass)) {
bpf_jit_binary_free(jit_data->header);
prog = orig_prog;
goto out_offset;
}
build_epilogue(ctx);
if (bpf_jit_enable > 1)
bpf_jit_dump(prog->len, image_size, 2, ctx->insns);
prog->bpf_func = (void *)ctx->insns;
prog->jited = 1;
prog->jited_len = image_size;
bpf_flush_icache(jit_data->header, ctx->insns + ctx->ninsns);
if (!prog->is_func || extra_pass) {
out_offset:
kfree(ctx->offset);
kfree(jit_data);
prog->aux->jit_data = NULL;
}
out:
if (tmp_blinded)
bpf_jit_prog_release_other(prog, prog == orig_prog ?
tmp : orig_prog);
return prog;
}