[PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline

Menglong Dong posted 6 patches 1 week, 6 days ago
[PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline
Posted by Menglong Dong 1 week, 6 days ago
Implement the "jmp" mode for the bpf trampoline. For the ftrace_managed
case, we need only to set the FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP on the tr->fops if "jmp"
is needed.

For the bpf poke case, we will check the origin poke type with the
"origin_flags", and current poke type with "tr->flags". The function
bpf_trampoline_update_fentry() is introduced to do the job.

The "jmp" mode will only be enabled with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
enabled and BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY is not set. With
BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY, we need to get the origin call ip from the
stack, so we can't use the "jmp" mode.

Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
---
v3:
- wrap the write to tr->fops->flags with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
- reset BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME when the second try of modify_fentry in
  bpf_trampoline_update()

v2:
- rename bpf_text_poke to bpf_trampoline_update_fentry
- remove the BPF_TRAMP_F_JMPED and check the current mode with the origin
  flags instead.
---
 kernel/bpf/trampoline.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
 1 file changed, 58 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
index 0230ad19533e..976d89011b15 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
@@ -175,24 +175,42 @@ static struct bpf_trampoline *bpf_trampoline_lookup(u64 key)
 	return tr;
 }
 
-static int unregister_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, void *old_addr)
+static int bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, u32 orig_flags,
+					void *old_addr, void *new_addr)
 {
+	enum bpf_text_poke_type new_t = BPF_MOD_CALL, old_t = BPF_MOD_CALL;
 	void *ip = tr->func.addr;
+
+	if (!new_addr)
+		new_t = BPF_MOD_NOP;
+	else if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
+		new_t = BPF_MOD_JUMP;
+
+	if (!old_addr)
+		old_t = BPF_MOD_NOP;
+	else if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(orig_flags))
+		old_t = BPF_MOD_JUMP;
+
+	return bpf_arch_text_poke(ip, old_t, new_t, old_addr, new_addr);
+}
+
+static int unregister_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, u32 orig_flags,
+			     void *old_addr)
+{
 	int ret;
 
 	if (tr->func.ftrace_managed)
 		ret = unregister_ftrace_direct(tr->fops, (long)old_addr, false);
 	else
-		ret = bpf_arch_text_poke(ip, BPF_MOD_CALL, BPF_MOD_NOP,
-					 old_addr, NULL);
+		ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, orig_flags, old_addr, NULL);
 
 	return ret;
 }
 
-static int modify_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, void *old_addr, void *new_addr,
+static int modify_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, u32 orig_flags,
+			 void *old_addr, void *new_addr,
 			 bool lock_direct_mutex)
 {
-	void *ip = tr->func.addr;
 	int ret;
 
 	if (tr->func.ftrace_managed) {
@@ -201,10 +219,8 @@ static int modify_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, void *old_addr, void *new_ad
 		else
 			ret = modify_ftrace_direct_nolock(tr->fops, (long)new_addr);
 	} else {
-		ret = bpf_arch_text_poke(ip,
-					 old_addr ? BPF_MOD_CALL : BPF_MOD_NOP,
-					 new_addr ? BPF_MOD_CALL : BPF_MOD_NOP,
-					 old_addr, new_addr);
+		ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, orig_flags, old_addr,
+						   new_addr);
 	}
 	return ret;
 }
@@ -229,8 +245,7 @@ static int register_fentry(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, void *new_addr)
 			return ret;
 		ret = register_ftrace_direct(tr->fops, (long)new_addr);
 	} else {
-		ret = bpf_arch_text_poke(ip, BPF_MOD_NOP, BPF_MOD_CALL,
-					 NULL, new_addr);
+		ret = bpf_trampoline_update_fentry(tr, 0, NULL, new_addr);
 	}
 
 	return ret;
@@ -416,7 +431,7 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
 		return PTR_ERR(tlinks);
 
 	if (total == 0) {
-		err = unregister_fentry(tr, tr->cur_image->image);
+		err = unregister_fentry(tr, orig_flags, tr->cur_image->image);
 		bpf_tramp_image_put(tr->cur_image);
 		tr->cur_image = NULL;
 		goto out;
@@ -440,9 +455,20 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_DIRECT_CALLS
 again:
-	if ((tr->flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY) &&
-	    (tr->flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG))
-		tr->flags |= BPF_TRAMP_F_ORIG_STACK;
+	if (tr->flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_CALL_ORIG) {
+		if (tr->flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY) {
+			/* The BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME can be cleared in the
+			 * first try, reset it in the second try.
+			 */
+			tr->flags |= BPF_TRAMP_F_ORIG_STACK | BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME;
+		} else if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP)) {
+			/* Use "jmp" instead of "call" for the trampoline
+			 * in the origin call case, and we don't need to
+			 * skip the frame.
+			 */
+			tr->flags &= ~BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME;
+		}
+	}
 #endif
 
 	size = arch_bpf_trampoline_size(&tr->func.model, tr->flags,
@@ -473,10 +499,18 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
 	if (err)
 		goto out_free;
 
+#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
+	if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
+		tr->fops->flags |= FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP;
+	else
+		tr->fops->flags &= ~FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP;
+#endif
+
 	WARN_ON(tr->cur_image && total == 0);
 	if (tr->cur_image)
 		/* progs already running at this address */
-		err = modify_fentry(tr, tr->cur_image->image, im->image, lock_direct_mutex);
+		err = modify_fentry(tr, orig_flags, tr->cur_image->image,
+				    im->image, lock_direct_mutex);
 	else
 		/* first time registering */
 		err = register_fentry(tr, im->image);
@@ -499,8 +533,15 @@ static int bpf_trampoline_update(struct bpf_trampoline *tr, bool lock_direct_mut
 	tr->cur_image = im;
 out:
 	/* If any error happens, restore previous flags */
-	if (err)
+	if (err) {
 		tr->flags = orig_flags;
+#ifdef CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
+		if (bpf_trampoline_use_jmp(tr->flags))
+			tr->fops->flags |= FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP;
+		else
+			tr->fops->flags &= ~FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP;
+#endif
+	}
 	kfree(tlinks);
 	return err;
 
-- 
2.51.2
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline
Posted by Alexei Starovoitov 1 week, 6 days ago
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 4:37 AM Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Implement the "jmp" mode for the bpf trampoline. For the ftrace_managed
> case, we need only to set the FTRACE_OPS_FL_JMP on the tr->fops if "jmp"
> is needed.
>
> For the bpf poke case, we will check the origin poke type with the
> "origin_flags", and current poke type with "tr->flags". The function
> bpf_trampoline_update_fentry() is introduced to do the job.
>
> The "jmp" mode will only be enabled with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
> enabled and BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY is not set. With
> BPF_TRAMP_F_SHARE_IPMODIFY, we need to get the origin call ip from the
> stack, so we can't use the "jmp" mode.
>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
> ---
> v3:
> - wrap the write to tr->fops->flags with CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE_WITH_JMP
> - reset BPF_TRAMP_F_SKIP_FRAME when the second try of modify_fentry in
>   bpf_trampoline_update()

All looks good to me.

Steven,
are you happy with patch 1?
Can you pls Ack?
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline
Posted by Steven Rostedt 1 week, 6 days ago
On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 16:59:59 -0800
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:

> Steven,
> are you happy with patch 1?
> Can you pls Ack?

Let me run patch 1 and 2 through my tests.

-- Steve
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline
Posted by Alexei Starovoitov 1 week, 3 days ago
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 5:02 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 16:59:59 -0800
> Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Steven,
> > are you happy with patch 1?
> > Can you pls Ack?
>
> Let me run patch 1 and 2 through my tests.

gentle ping.
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 6/6] bpf: implement "jmp" mode for trampoline
Posted by Steven Rostedt 1 week ago
On Fri, 21 Nov 2025 18:37:02 -0800
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 5:02 PM Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Nov 2025 16:59:59 -0800
> > Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >  
> > > Steven,
> > > are you happy with patch 1?
> > > Can you pls Ack?  
> >
> > Let me run patch 1 and 2 through my tests.  
> 
> gentle ping.

Yeah, sorry forgot to reply. They did pass.

Acked-by: Steven Rostedt (Google) <rostedt@goodmis.org>

-- Steve