Add bpf_for_each(), bpf_for(), and bpf_repeat() macros that make writing
open-coded iterator-based loops much more convenient and natural. These
macros utilize cleanup attribute to ensure proper destruction of the
iterator and thanks to that manage to provide the ergonomics that is
very close to C language's for() construct. Typical loop would look like:
int i;
int arr[N];
bpf_for(i, 0, N) {
/* verifier will know that i >= 0 && i < N, so could be used to
* directly access array elements with no extra checks
*/
arr[i] = i;
}
bpf_repeat() is very similar, but it doesn't expose iteration number and
is meant as a simple "repeat action N times" loop:
bpf_repeat(N) { /* whatever, N times */ }
Note that `break` and `continue` statements inside the {} block work as
expected.
bpf_for_each() is a generalization over any kind of BPF open-coded
iterator allowing to use for-each-like approach instead of calling
low-level bpf_iter_<type>_{new,next,destroy}() APIs explicitly. E.g.:
struct cgroup *cg;
bpf_for_each(cgroup, cg, some, input, args) {
/* do something with each cg */
}
would call (not-yet-implemented) bpf_iter_cgroup_{new,next,destroy}()
functions to form a loop over cgroups, where `some, input, args` are
passed verbatim into constructor as
bpf_iter_cgroup_new(&it, some, input, args).
As a first demonstration, add pyperf variant based on the bpf_for() loop.
Also clean up a few tests that either included bpf_misc.h header
unnecessarily from the user-space, which is unsupported, or included it
before any common types are defined (and thus leading to unnecessary
compilation warnings, potentially).
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230308184121.1165081-6-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Update uprobe_autoattach selftest to validate architecture-specific
argument passing through registers. Use new BPF_UPROBE and
BPF_URETPROBE, and construct both BPF-side and user-space side in such
a way that for different architectures we are fetching and checking
different number of arguments, matching architecture-specific limit of
how many registers are available for argument passing.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com> # arm64
Tested-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> # s390x
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230120200914.3008030-12-andrii@kernel.org
I am getting the following compilation error for prog_tests/uprobe_autoattach.c:
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/uprobe_autoattach.c: In function ‘test_uprobe_autoattach’:
./test_progs.h:209:26: error: pointer ‘mem’ may be used after ‘free’ [-Werror=use-after-free]
The value of mem is now used in one of the asserts, which is why it may be
confusing compilers. However, it is not dereferenced. Silence this by moving
free(mem) after the assert block.
Fixes: 1717e24801 ("selftests/bpf: Uprobe tests should verify param/return values")
Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220421132317.1583867-1-asavkov@redhat.com
uprobe/uretprobe tests don't do any validation of arguments/return values,
and without this we can't be sure we are attached to the right function,
or that we are indeed attached to a uprobe or uretprobe. To fix this
record argument and return value for auto-attached functions and ensure
these match expectations. Also need to filter by pid to ensure we do
not pick up stray malloc()s since auto-attach traces libc system-wide.
Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/1649245431-29956-4-git-send-email-alan.maguire@oracle.com
