Re: [PATCH v2] bpf, x86_32: add eBPF JIT compiler for ia32

From: Daniel Borkmann
Date: Tue Apr 24 2018 - 20:11:45 EST

Next message: Kuninori Morimoto: "Re: [PATCH v3][RESEND] media: i2c: tda1997: replace codec to component"
Previous message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [RFC v4 3/4] irqflags: Avoid unnecessary calls to trace_ if you can"
Next in thread: Wang YanQing: "Re: [PATCH v2] bpf, x86_32: add eBPF JIT compiler for ia32"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On 04/19/2018 05:54 PM, Wang YanQing wrote:
> The JIT compiler emits ia32 bit instructions. Currently, It supports
> eBPF only. Classic BPF is supported because of the conversion by BPF core.
>
> Almost all instructions from eBPF ISA supported except the following:
> BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_K
> BPF_ALU64 | BPF_DIV | BPF_X
> BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K
> BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_X
> BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_W
> BPF_STX | BPF_XADD | BPF_DW
>
> It doesn't support BPF_JMP|BPF_CALL with BPF_PSEUDO_CALL too.
>
> ia32 has few general purpose registers, EAX|EDX|ECX|EBX|ESI|EDI,
> and in these six registers, we can't treat all of them as real
> general purpose registers in jit:
> MUL instructions need EAX:EDX, shift instructions need ECX.
>
> So I decide to use stack to emulate all eBPF 64 registers, this will
> simplify the implementation a lot, because we don't need to face the
> flexible memory address modes on ia32, for example, we don't need to
> write below code pattern for one BPF_ADD instruction:
>
> if (src is a register && dst is a register)
> {
> //one instruction encoding for ADD instruction
> } else if (only src is a register)
> {
> //another different instruction encoding for ADD instruction
> } else if (only dst is a register)
> {
> //another different instruction encoding for ADD instruction
> } else
> {
> //src and dst are all on stack.
> //move src or dst to temporary registers
> }
>
> If the above example if-else-else-else isn't so painful, try to think
> it for BPF_ALU64|BPF_*SHIFT* instruction which we need to use many
> native instructions to emulate.
>
> Tested on my PC (Intel(R) Core(TM) i5-5200U CPU) and virtualbox.

Just out of plain curiosity, do you have a specific use case on the
JIT for x86_32? Are you targeting this to be used for e.g. Atom or
the like (sorry, don't really have a good overview where x86_32 is
still in use these days)?

> Testing results on i5-5200U:
>
> 1) test_bpf: Summary: 349 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [319/341 JIT'ed]
> 2) test_progs: Summary: 81 PASSED, 2 FAILED.
> test_progs report "libbpf: incorrect bpf_call opcode" for
> test_l4lb_noinline and test_xdp_noinline, because there is
> no llvm-6.0 on my machine, and current implementation doesn't
> support BPF_PSEUDO_CALL, so I think we can ignore the two failed
> testcases.
> 3) test_lpm: OK
> 4) test_lru_map: OK
> 5) test_verifier: Summary: 823 PASSED, 5 FAILED
> test_verifier report "invalid bpf_context access off=68 size=1/2/4/8"
> for all the 5 FAILED testcases with/without jit, we need to fix the
> failed testcases themself instead of this jit.

Can you elaborate further on these? Looks like this definitely needs
fixing on 32 bit. Would be great to get a better understanding of the
underlying bug(s) and properly fix them.

> Above tests are all done with following flags settings discretely:
> 1:bpf_jit_enable=1 and bpf_jit_harden=0
> 2:bpf_jit_enable=1 and bpf_jit_harden=2
>
> Below are some numbers for this jit implementation:
> Note:
> I run test_progs in kselftest 100 times continuously for every testcase,
> the numbers are in format: total/times=avg.
> The numbers that test_bpf reports show almost the same relation.
>
> a:jit_enable=0 and jit_harden=0 b:jit_enable=1 and jit_harden=0
> test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv4:15622/100=156 test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv4:10057/100=100
> test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv6:9130/100=91 test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv6:5055/100=50
> test_xdp:PASS:ipv4:240198/100=2401 test_xdp:PASS:ipv4:145945/100=1459
> test_xdp:PASS:ipv6:137326/100=1373 test_xdp:PASS:ipv6:67337/100=673
> test_l4lb:PASS:ipv4:61100/100=611 test_l4lb:PASS:ipv4:38137/100=381
> test_l4lb:PASS:ipv6:101000/100=1010 test_l4lb:PASS:ipv6:57779/100=577
>
> c:jit_enable=1 and jit_harden=2
> test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv4:12650/100=126
> test_pkt_access:PASS:ipv6:7074/100=70
> test_xdp:PASS:ipv4:147211/100=1472
> test_xdp:PASS:ipv6:85783/100=857
> test_l4lb:PASS:ipv4:53222/100=532
> test_l4lb:PASS:ipv6:76322/100=763
>
> Yes, the numbers are pretty when turn off jit_harden, if we want to speedup
> jit_harden, then we need to move BPF_REG_AX to *real* register instead of stack
> emulation, but when we do it, we need to face all the pain I describe above. We
> can do it in next step.
>
> See Documentation/networking/filter.txt for more information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wang YanQing <udknight@xxxxxxxxx>
[...]
> + /* call */
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL:
> + {
> + const u8 *r1 = bpf2ia32[BPF_REG_1];
> + const u8 *r2 = bpf2ia32[BPF_REG_2];
> + const u8 *r3 = bpf2ia32[BPF_REG_3];
> + const u8 *r4 = bpf2ia32[BPF_REG_4];
> + const u8 *r5 = bpf2ia32[BPF_REG_5];
> +
> + if (insn->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_CALL)
> + goto notyet;

Here you bail out on BPF_PSEUDO_CALL, but in below bpf_int_jit_compile() you
implement half of e.g. 1c2a088a6626 ("bpf: x64: add JIT support for multi-function
programs"), which is rather confusing to leave it in this half complete state;
either remove altogether or implement everything.

> + func = (u8 *) __bpf_call_base + imm32;
> + jmp_offset = func - (image + addrs[i]);
> +
> + if (!imm32 || !is_simm32(jmp_offset)) {
> + pr_err("unsupported bpf func %d addr %p image %p\n",
> + imm32, func, image);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + /* mov eax,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp2[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(r1[0]));
> + /* mov edx,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp2[1]),
> + STACK_VAR(r1[1]));
> +
> + emit_push_r64(r5, &prog);
> + emit_push_r64(r4, &prog);
> + emit_push_r64(r3, &prog);
> + emit_push_r64(r2, &prog);
> +
> + EMIT1_off32(0xE8, jmp_offset + 9);
> +
> + /* mov dword ptr [ebp+off],eax */
> + EMIT3(0x89, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp2[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(r0[0]));
> + /* mov dword ptr [ebp+off],edx */
> + EMIT3(0x89, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp2[1]),
> + STACK_VAR(r0[1]));
> +
> + /* add esp,32 */
> + EMIT3(0x83, add_1reg(0xC0, IA32_ESP), 32);
> + break;
> + }
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_TAIL_CALL:
> + emit_bpf_tail_call(&prog);
> + break;
> +
> + /* cond jump */
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGT | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLT | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGE | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLE | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGT | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLE | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLT | BPF_X:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGE | BPF_X:
> + /* mov esi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(src_hi));
> + /* cmp dword ptr [ebp+off], esi */
> + EMIT3(0x39, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_hi));
> +
> + EMIT2(IA32_JNE, 6);
> + /* mov esi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(src_lo));
> + /* cmp dword ptr [ebp+off], esi */
> + EMIT3(0x39, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_lo));
> + goto emit_cond_jmp;
> +
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_X:
> + /* mov esi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_lo));
> + /* and esi,dword ptr [ebp+off]*/
> + EMIT3(0x23, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(src_lo));
> +
> + /* mov edi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[1]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_hi));
> + /* and edi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x23, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[1]),
> + STACK_VAR(src_hi));
> + /* or esi,edi */
> + EMIT2(0x09, add_2reg(0xC0, tmp[0], tmp[1]));
> + goto emit_cond_jmp;
> +
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSET | BPF_K: {
> + u32 hi;
> +
> + hi = imm32 & (1<<31) ? (u32)~0 : 0;
> + /* mov esi,imm32 */
> + EMIT2_off32(0xC7, add_1reg(0xC0, tmp[0]), imm32);
> + /* and esi,dword ptr [ebp+off]*/
> + EMIT3(0x23, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_lo));
> +
> + /* mov esi,imm32 */
> + EMIT2_off32(0xC7, add_1reg(0xC0, tmp[1]), hi);
> + /* and esi,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x23, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[1]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_hi));
> + /* or esi,edi */
> + EMIT2(0x09, add_2reg(0xC0, tmp[0], tmp[1]));
> + goto emit_cond_jmp;
> + }
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JEQ | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JNE | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGT | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLT | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JGE | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JLE | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGT | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLE | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSLT | BPF_K:
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JSGE | BPF_K: {
> + u32 hi;
> +
> + hi = imm32 & (1<<31) ? (u32)~0 : 0;
> + /* mov esi,imm32 */
> + EMIT2_off32(0xC7, add_1reg(0xC0, tmp[0]), hi);
> + /* cmp dword ptr [ebp+off],esi */
> + EMIT3(0x39, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_hi));
> +
> + EMIT2(IA32_JNE, 6);
> + /* mov esi,imm32 */
> + EMIT2_off32(0xC7, add_1reg(0xC0, tmp[0]), imm32);
> + /* cmp dword ptr [ebp+off],esi */
> + EMIT3(0x39, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, tmp[0]),
> + STACK_VAR(dst_lo));
> +
> +emit_cond_jmp: /* convert BPF opcode to x86 */
> + switch (BPF_OP(code)) {
> + case BPF_JEQ:
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JE;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JSET:
> + case BPF_JNE:
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JNE;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JGT:
> + /* GT is unsigned '>', JA in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JA;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JLT:
> + /* LT is unsigned '<', JB in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JB;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JGE:
> + /* GE is unsigned '>=', JAE in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JAE;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JLE:
> + /* LE is unsigned '<=', JBE in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JBE;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JSGT:
> + /* signed '>', GT in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JG;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JSLT:
> + /* signed '<', LT in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JL;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JSGE:
> + /* signed '>=', GE in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JGE;
> + break;
> + case BPF_JSLE:
> + /* signed '<=', LE in x86 */
> + jmp_cond = IA32_JLE;
> + break;
> + default: /* to silence gcc warning */
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> + jmp_offset = addrs[i + insn->off] - addrs[i];
> + if (is_imm8(jmp_offset)) {
> + EMIT2(jmp_cond, jmp_offset);
> + } else if (is_simm32(jmp_offset)) {
> + EMIT2_off32(0x0F, jmp_cond + 0x10, jmp_offset);
> + } else {
> + pr_err("cond_jmp gen bug %llx\n", jmp_offset);
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> +
> + break;
> + }
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_JA:
> + jmp_offset = addrs[i + insn->off] - addrs[i];
> + if (!jmp_offset)
> + /* optimize out nop jumps */
> + break;
> +emit_jmp:
> + if (is_imm8(jmp_offset)) {
> + EMIT2(0xEB, jmp_offset);
> + } else if (is_simm32(jmp_offset)) {
> + EMIT1_off32(0xE9, jmp_offset);
> + } else {
> + pr_err("jmp gen bug %llx\n", jmp_offset);
> + return -EFAULT;
> + }
> + break;
> +
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_IND | BPF_W:
> + func = sk_load_word;
> + goto common_load;
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_ABS | BPF_W:
> + func = CHOOSE_LOAD_FUNC(imm32, sk_load_word);
> +common_load:
> + jmp_offset = func - (image + addrs[i]);
> + if (!func || !is_simm32(jmp_offset)) {
> + pr_err("unsupported bpf func %d addr %p image %p\n",
> + imm32, func, image);
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> + if (BPF_MODE(code) == BPF_ABS) {
> + /* mov %edx, imm32 */
> + EMIT1_off32(0xBA, imm32);
> + } else {
> + /* mov edx,dword ptr [ebp+off] */
> + EMIT3(0x8B, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, IA32_EDX),
> + STACK_VAR(src_lo));
> + if (imm32) {
> + if (is_imm8(imm32))
> + /* add %edx, imm8 */
> + EMIT3(0x83, 0xC2, imm32);
> + else
> + /* add %edx, imm32 */
> + EMIT2_off32(0x81, 0xC2, imm32);
> + }
> + }
> + emit_load_skb_data_hlen(&prog);

The only place where you call the emit_load_skb_data_hlen() is here, so it
effectively doesn't cache anything as with the other JITs. I would suggest
to keep the complexity of the BPF_ABS/IND rather very low, remove the
arch/x86/net/bpf_jit32.S handling altogether and just follow the model the
way arm64 implemented this in the arch/arm64/net/bpf_jit_comp.c JIT. For
eBPF these instructions are legacy and have been source of many subtle
bugs in the various BPF JITs in the past, plus nobody complained about the
current interpreter speed for LD_ABS/IND on x86_32 anyway so far. ;) We're
also very close to have a rewrite of LD_ABS/IND out of native eBPF with
similar performance to be able to finally remove them from the core.

> + EMIT1_off32(0xE8, jmp_offset + 10); /* call */
> +
> + /* mov dword ptr [ebp+off],eax */
> + EMIT3(0x89, add_2reg(0x40, IA32_EBP, IA32_EAX),
> + STACK_VAR(r0[0]));
> + EMIT3(0xC7, add_1reg(0x40, IA32_EBP), STACK_VAR(r0[1]));
> + EMIT(0x0, 4);
> + break;
> +
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_IND | BPF_H:
> + func = sk_load_half;
> + goto common_load;
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_ABS | BPF_H:
> + func = CHOOSE_LOAD_FUNC(imm32, sk_load_half);
> + goto common_load;
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_IND | BPF_B:
> + func = sk_load_byte;
> + goto common_load;
> + case BPF_LD | BPF_ABS | BPF_B:
> + func = CHOOSE_LOAD_FUNC(imm32, sk_load_byte);
> + goto common_load;
> + /* 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:
> + goto notyet;
> + case BPF_JMP | BPF_EXIT:
> + if (seen_exit) {
> + jmp_offset = ctx->cleanup_addr - addrs[i];
> + goto emit_jmp;
> + }
> + seen_exit = true;
> + /* update cleanup_addr */
> + ctx->cleanup_addr = proglen;
> + emit_epilogue(&prog, bpf_prog->aux->stack_depth);
> + break;
> +notyet:
> + pr_info_once("*** NOT YET: opcode %02x ***\n", code);
> + return -EFAULT;
> + default:
> + /* This error will be seen if new instruction was added
> + * to interpreter, but not to JIT
[...]

Thanks,
Daniel

Next message: Kuninori Morimoto: "Re: [PATCH v3][RESEND] media: i2c: tda1997: replace codec to component"
Previous message: Paul E. McKenney: "Re: [RFC v4 3/4] irqflags: Avoid unnecessary calls to trace_ if you can"
Next in thread: Wang YanQing: "Re: [PATCH v2] bpf, x86_32: add eBPF JIT compiler for ia32"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]