Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

bpftool: Add bpf_cookie to link output #129

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

bpftool: Add bpf_cookie to link output #129

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

kernel-patches-bot
Copy link

Pull request for series with
subject: bpftool: Add bpf_cookie to link output
version: 6
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 3399dd9
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: de55c9a
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: eecbfd9
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 743bec1
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 5861701
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 1b773d0
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 357b3cc
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: a77c2cf
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 6789ab9
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: c09df4b
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: d3b351f
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 2486ab4
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: 8fa42d7
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: f98d6dd
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943
version: 6

@erthalion
bpftool: Add bpf_cookie to link output
52a623b 
Commit 82e6b1e ("bpf: Allow to specify user-provided bpf_cookie for
BPF perf links") introduced the concept of user specified bpf_cookie,
which could be accessed by BPF programs using bpf_get_attach_cookie().
For troubleshooting purposes it is convenient to expose bpf_cookie via
bpftool as well, so there is no need to meddle with the target BPF
program itself.

Implemented using the pid iterator BPF program to actually fetch
bpf_cookies, which allows constraining code changes only to bpftool.

$ bpftool link
1: type 7  prog 5
        bpf_cookie 123
        pids bootstrap(81)

Signed-off-by: Dmitrii Dolgov <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=621943 irrelevant now. Closing PR.

@kernel-patches-bot kernel-patches-bot deleted the series/611386=>bpf-next branch March 15, 2022 22:15
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023
@pv @Vudentz
Bluetooth: ISO: do not emit new LE Create CIS if previous is pending
7f74563 
LE Create CIS command shall not be sent before all CIS Established
events from its previous invocation have been processed. Currently it is
sent via hci_sync but that only waits for the first event, but there can
be multiple.

Make it wait for all events, and simplify the CIS creation as follows:

Add new flag HCI_CONN_CREATE_CIS, which is set if Create CIS has been
sent for the connection but it is not yet completed.

Make BT_CONNECT state to mean the connection wants Create CIS.

On events after which new Create CIS may need to be sent, send it if
possible and some connections need it. These events are:
hci_connect_cis, iso_connect_cfm, hci_cs_le_create_cis,
hci_le_cis_estabilished_evt.

The Create CIS status/completion events shall queue new Create CIS only
if at least one of the connections transitions away from BT_CONNECT, so
that we don't loop if controller is sending bogus events.

This fixes sending multiple CIS Create for the same CIS in the
"ISO AC 6(i) - Success" BlueZ test case:

< HCI Command: LE Create Co.. (0x08|0x0064) plen 9  #129 [hci0]
        Number of CIS: 2
        CIS Handle: 257
        ACL Handle: 42
        CIS Handle: 258
        ACL Handle: 42
> HCI Event: Command Status (0x0f) plen 4           #130 [hci0]
      LE Create Connected Isochronous Stream (0x08|0x0064) ncmd 1
        Status: Success (0x00)
> HCI Event: LE Meta Event (0x3e) plen 29           #131 [hci0]
      LE Connected Isochronous Stream Established (0x19)
        Status: Success (0x00)
        Connection Handle: 257
        ...
< HCI Command: LE Setup Is.. (0x08|0x006e) plen 13  #132 [hci0]
        ...
> HCI Event: Command Complete (0x0e) plen 6         #133 [hci0]
      LE Setup Isochronous Data Path (0x08|0x006e) ncmd 1
        ...
< HCI Command: LE Create Co.. (0x08|0x0064) plen 5  #134 [hci0]
        Number of CIS: 1
        CIS Handle: 258
        ACL Handle: 42
> HCI Event: Command Status (0x0f) plen 4           #135 [hci0]
      LE Create Connected Isochronous Stream (0x08|0x0064) ncmd 1
        Status: ACL Connection Already Exists (0x0b)
> HCI Event: LE Meta Event (0x3e) plen 29           #136 [hci0]
      LE Connected Isochronous Stream Established (0x19)
        Status: Success (0x00)
        Connection Handle: 258
        ...

Fixes: c09b80b ("Bluetooth: hci_conn: Fix not waiting for HCI_EVT_LE_CIS_ESTABLISHED")
Signed-off-by: Pauli Virtanen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Luiz Augusto von Dentz <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2024
@chenhengqi @chenhuacai
LoongArch: BPF: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs
21c5ae5 
Like commit 1cf3bfc ("bpf: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs")
for s390x, add support for 64-bit pointers to kfuncs for LoongArch.
Since the infrastructure is already implemented in BPF core, the only
thing need to be done is to override bpf_jit_supports_far_kfunc_call().

Before this change, several test_verifier tests failed:

  # ./test_verifier | grep # | grep FAIL
  #119/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with non-scalar FAIL
  #120/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with nesting depth > 4 FAIL
  #121/p calls: invalid kfunc call: ptr_to_mem to struct with FAM FAIL
  #122/p calls: invalid kfunc call: reg->type != PTR_TO_CTX FAIL
  #123/p calls: invalid kfunc call: void * not allowed in func proto without mem size arg FAIL
  #124/p calls: trigger reg2btf_ids[reg->type] for reg->type > __BPF_REG_TYPE_MAX FAIL
  #125/p calls: invalid kfunc call: reg->off must be zero when passed to release kfunc FAIL
  #126/p calls: invalid kfunc call: don't match first member type when passed to release kfunc FAIL
  #127/p calls: invalid kfunc call: PTR_TO_BTF_ID with negative offset FAIL
  #128/p calls: invalid kfunc call: PTR_TO_BTF_ID with variable offset FAIL
  #129/p calls: invalid kfunc call: referenced arg needs refcounted PTR_TO_BTF_ID FAIL
  #130/p calls: valid kfunc call: referenced arg needs refcounted PTR_TO_BTF_ID FAIL
  #486/p map_kptr: ref: reference state created and released on xchg FAIL

This is because the kfuncs in the loaded module are far away from
__bpf_call_base:

  ffff800002009440 t bpf_kfunc_call_test_fail1    [bpf_testmod]
  9000000002e128d8 T __bpf_call_base

The offset relative to __bpf_call_base does NOT fit in s32, which breaks
the assumption in BPF core. Enable bpf_jit_supports_far_kfunc_call() lifts
this limit.

Note that to reproduce the above result, tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
should be applied, and run the test with JIT enabled, unpriv BPF enabled.

With this change, the test_verifier tests now all passed:

  # ./test_verifier
  ...
  Summary: 777 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Tested-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Hengqi Chen <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Huacai Chen <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
accepted bpf-next V6
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@kernel-patches-bot @erthalion