[PATCH bpf-next v9 07/11] bpf,x86: add fsession support for x86_64

Menglong Dong posted 11 patches 4 weeks, 1 day ago
There is a newer version of this series
[PATCH bpf-next v9 07/11] bpf,x86: add fsession support for x86_64
Posted by Menglong Dong 4 weeks, 1 day ago
Add BPF_TRACE_FSESSION supporting to x86_64, including:

1. clear the return value in the stack before fentry to make the fentry
   of the fsession can only get 0 with bpf_get_func_ret().

2. clear all the session cookies' value in the stack.

2. store the index of the cookie to ctx[-1] before the calling to fsession

3. store the "is_return" flag to ctx[-1] before the calling to fexit of
   the fsession.

Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
Co-developed-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
---
v5:
- add the variable "func_meta"
- define cookie_off in a new line

v4:
- some adjustment to the 1st patch, such as we get the fsession prog from
  fentry and fexit hlist
- remove the supporting of skipping fexit with fentry return non-zero

v2:
- add session cookie support
- add the session stuff after return value, instead of before nr_args
---
 arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
index d94f7038c441..0671a434c00d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
+++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
@@ -3094,12 +3094,17 @@ static int emit_cond_near_jump(u8 **pprog, void *func, void *ip, u8 jmp_cond)
 static int invoke_bpf(const struct btf_func_model *m, u8 **pprog,
 		      struct bpf_tramp_links *tl, int stack_size,
 		      int run_ctx_off, bool save_ret,
-		      void *image, void *rw_image)
+		      void *image, void *rw_image, u64 func_meta)
 {
 	int i;
 	u8 *prog = *pprog;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < tl->nr_links; i++) {
+		if (tl->links[i]->link.prog->call_session_cookie) {
+			/* 'stack_size + 8' is the offset of func_md in stack */
+			emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, stack_size + 8, func_meta);
+			func_meta -= (1 << BPF_TRAMP_M_COOKIE);
+		}
 		if (invoke_bpf_prog(m, &prog, tl->links[i], stack_size,
 				    run_ctx_off, save_ret, image, rw_image))
 			return -EINVAL;
@@ -3222,7 +3227,9 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
 	struct bpf_tramp_links *fexit = &tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_FEXIT];
 	struct bpf_tramp_links *fmod_ret = &tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_MODIFY_RETURN];
 	void *orig_call = func_addr;
+	int cookie_off, cookie_cnt;
 	u8 **branches = NULL;
+	u64 func_meta;
 	u8 *prog;
 	bool save_ret;
 
@@ -3290,6 +3297,11 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
 
 	ip_off = stack_size;
 
+	cookie_cnt = bpf_fsession_cookie_cnt(tlinks);
+	/* room for session cookies */
+	stack_size += cookie_cnt * 8;
+	cookie_off = stack_size;
+
 	stack_size += 8;
 	rbx_off = stack_size;
 
@@ -3383,9 +3395,19 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
 		}
 	}
 
+	if (bpf_fsession_cnt(tlinks)) {
+		/* clear all the session cookies' value */
+		for (int i = 0; i < cookie_cnt; i++)
+			emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, cookie_off - 8 * i, 0);
+		/* clear the return value to make sure fentry always get 0 */
+		emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, 8, 0);
+	}
+	func_meta = nr_regs + (((cookie_off - regs_off) / 8) << BPF_TRAMP_M_COOKIE);
+
 	if (fentry->nr_links) {
 		if (invoke_bpf(m, &prog, fentry, regs_off, run_ctx_off,
-			       flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET, image, rw_image))
+			       flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET, image, rw_image,
+			       func_meta))
 			return -EINVAL;
 	}
 
@@ -3445,9 +3467,14 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
 		}
 	}
 
+	/* set the "is_return" flag for fsession */
+	func_meta += (1 << BPF_TRAMP_M_IS_RETURN);
+	if (bpf_fsession_cnt(tlinks))
+		emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, nregs_off, func_meta);
+
 	if (fexit->nr_links) {
 		if (invoke_bpf(m, &prog, fexit, regs_off, run_ctx_off,
-			       false, image, rw_image)) {
+			       false, image, rw_image, func_meta)) {
 			ret = -EINVAL;
 			goto cleanup;
 		}
-- 
2.52.0
Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 07/11] bpf,x86: add fsession support for x86_64
Posted by Andrii Nakryiko 3 weeks, 5 days ago
On Sat, Jan 10, 2026 at 6:12 AM Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Add BPF_TRACE_FSESSION supporting to x86_64, including:
>
> 1. clear the return value in the stack before fentry to make the fentry
>    of the fsession can only get 0 with bpf_get_func_ret().
>
> 2. clear all the session cookies' value in the stack.
>
> 2. store the index of the cookie to ctx[-1] before the calling to fsession
>
> 3. store the "is_return" flag to ctx[-1] before the calling to fexit of
>    the fsession.
>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <dongml2@chinatelecom.cn>
> Co-developed-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <leon.hwang@linux.dev>
> ---
> v5:
> - add the variable "func_meta"
> - define cookie_off in a new line
>
> v4:
> - some adjustment to the 1st patch, such as we get the fsession prog from
>   fentry and fexit hlist
> - remove the supporting of skipping fexit with fentry return non-zero
>
> v2:
> - add session cookie support
> - add the session stuff after return value, instead of before nr_args
> ---
>  arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>  1 file changed, 30 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> index d94f7038c441..0671a434c00d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/net/bpf_jit_comp.c
> @@ -3094,12 +3094,17 @@ static int emit_cond_near_jump(u8 **pprog, void *func, void *ip, u8 jmp_cond)
>  static int invoke_bpf(const struct btf_func_model *m, u8 **pprog,
>                       struct bpf_tramp_links *tl, int stack_size,
>                       int run_ctx_off, bool save_ret,
> -                     void *image, void *rw_image)
> +                     void *image, void *rw_image, u64 func_meta)
>  {
>         int i;
>         u8 *prog = *pprog;
>
>         for (i = 0; i < tl->nr_links; i++) {
> +               if (tl->links[i]->link.prog->call_session_cookie) {
> +                       /* 'stack_size + 8' is the offset of func_md in stack */

not func_md, don't invent new names, "func_meta" (but it's also so
backwards that you have stack offsets as positive... and it's not even
in verifier's stack slots, just bytes... very confusing to me)

> +                       emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, stack_size + 8, func_meta);
> +                       func_meta -= (1 << BPF_TRAMP_M_COOKIE);

was this supposed to be BPF_TRAMP_M_IS_RETURN?... and why didn't AI catch this?

> +               }
>                 if (invoke_bpf_prog(m, &prog, tl->links[i], stack_size,
>                                     run_ctx_off, save_ret, image, rw_image))
>                         return -EINVAL;
> @@ -3222,7 +3227,9 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
>         struct bpf_tramp_links *fexit = &tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_FEXIT];
>         struct bpf_tramp_links *fmod_ret = &tlinks[BPF_TRAMP_MODIFY_RETURN];
>         void *orig_call = func_addr;
> +       int cookie_off, cookie_cnt;
>         u8 **branches = NULL;
> +       u64 func_meta;
>         u8 *prog;
>         bool save_ret;
>
> @@ -3290,6 +3297,11 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
>
>         ip_off = stack_size;
>
> +       cookie_cnt = bpf_fsession_cookie_cnt(tlinks);
> +       /* room for session cookies */
> +       stack_size += cookie_cnt * 8;
> +       cookie_off = stack_size;
> +
>         stack_size += 8;
>         rbx_off = stack_size;
>
> @@ -3383,9 +3395,19 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
>                 }
>         }
>
> +       if (bpf_fsession_cnt(tlinks)) {
> +               /* clear all the session cookies' value */
> +               for (int i = 0; i < cookie_cnt; i++)
> +                       emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, cookie_off - 8 * i, 0);
> +               /* clear the return value to make sure fentry always get 0 */
> +               emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, 8, 0);
> +       }
> +       func_meta = nr_regs + (((cookie_off - regs_off) / 8) << BPF_TRAMP_M_COOKIE);

func_meta conceptually is a collection of bit fields, so using +/-
feels weird, use | and &, more in line with working with bits?

(also you defined that BPF_TRAMP_M_NR_ARGS but you are not using it
consistently...)




> +
>         if (fentry->nr_links) {
>                 if (invoke_bpf(m, &prog, fentry, regs_off, run_ctx_off,
> -                              flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET, image, rw_image))
> +                              flags & BPF_TRAMP_F_RET_FENTRY_RET, image, rw_image,
> +                              func_meta))
>                         return -EINVAL;
>         }
>
> @@ -3445,9 +3467,14 @@ static int __arch_prepare_bpf_trampoline(struct bpf_tramp_image *im, void *rw_im
>                 }
>         }
>
> +       /* set the "is_return" flag for fsession */
> +       func_meta += (1 << BPF_TRAMP_M_IS_RETURN);
> +       if (bpf_fsession_cnt(tlinks))
> +               emit_store_stack_imm64(&prog, nregs_off, func_meta);
> +
>         if (fexit->nr_links) {
>                 if (invoke_bpf(m, &prog, fexit, regs_off, run_ctx_off,
> -                              false, image, rw_image)) {
> +                              false, image, rw_image, func_meta)) {
>                         ret = -EINVAL;
>                         goto cleanup;
>                 }
> --
> 2.52.0
>