@@ -5409,6 +5409,12 @@ union bpf_attr {
* Return
* 0
*
+ * void *bpf_rbtree_get_lock(struct bpf_map *map)
+ * Description
+ * Return the bpf_spin_lock associated with the rbtree
+ *
+ * Return
+ * Ptr to lock
*/
#define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN) \
FN(unspec), \
@@ -5625,6 +5631,7 @@ union bpf_attr {
FN(rbtree_find), \
FN(rbtree_remove), \
FN(rbtree_free_node), \
+ FN(rbtree_get_lock), \
/* */
/* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
@@ -1603,6 +1603,7 @@ const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_add_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_find_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_remove_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_free_node_proto __weak;
+const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto __weak;
const struct bpf_func_proto *
bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
@@ -1704,6 +1705,8 @@ bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
return &bpf_rbtree_remove_proto;
case BPF_FUNC_rbtree_free_node:
return &bpf_rbtree_free_node_proto;
+ case BPF_FUNC_rbtree_get_lock:
+ return &bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto;
default:
break;
}
@@ -10,6 +10,7 @@
struct bpf_rbtree {
struct bpf_map map;
struct rb_root_cached root;
+ struct bpf_spin_lock *lock;
};
static int rbtree_map_alloc_check(union bpf_attr *attr)
@@ -38,6 +39,14 @@ static struct bpf_map *rbtree_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
tree->root = RB_ROOT_CACHED;
bpf_map_init_from_attr(&tree->map, attr);
+
+ tree->lock = bpf_map_kzalloc(&tree->map, sizeof(struct bpf_spin_lock),
+ GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_NOWARN);
+ if (!tree->lock) {
+ bpf_map_area_free(tree);
+ return ERR_PTR(-ENOMEM);
+ }
+
return &tree->map;
}
@@ -139,6 +148,7 @@ static void rbtree_map_free(struct bpf_map *map)
bpf_rbtree_postorder_for_each_entry_safe(pos, n, &tree->root.rb_root)
kfree(pos);
+ kfree(tree->lock);
bpf_map_area_free(tree);
}
@@ -238,6 +248,20 @@ static int rbtree_map_get_next_key(struct bpf_map *map, void *key,
return -ENOTSUPP;
}
+BPF_CALL_1(bpf_rbtree_get_lock, struct bpf_map *, map)
+{
+ struct bpf_rbtree *tree = container_of(map, struct bpf_rbtree, map);
+
+ return (u64)tree->lock;
+}
+
+const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_rbtree_get_lock_proto = {
+ .func = bpf_rbtree_get_lock,
+ .gpl_only = true,
+ .ret_type = RET_PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE,
+ .arg1_type = ARG_CONST_MAP_PTR,
+};
+
BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_rbtree_map_btf_ids, struct, bpf_rbtree)
const struct bpf_map_ops rbtree_map_ops = {
.map_meta_equal = bpf_map_meta_equal,
@@ -5409,6 +5409,12 @@ union bpf_attr {
* Return
* 0
*
+ * void *bpf_rbtree_get_lock(struct bpf_map *map)
+ * Description
+ * Return the bpf_spin_lock associated with the rbtree
+ *
+ * Return
+ * Ptr to lock
*/
#define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN) \
FN(unspec), \
@@ -5625,6 +5631,7 @@ union bpf_attr {
FN(rbtree_find), \
FN(rbtree_remove), \
FN(rbtree_free_node), \
+ FN(rbtree_get_lock), \
/* */
/* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
This patch adds a struct bpf_spin_lock *lock member to bpf_rbtree, as well as a bpf_rbtree_get_lock helper which allows bpf programs to access the lock. Ideally the bpf_spin_lock would be created independently oustide of the tree and associated with it before the tree is used, either as part of map definition or via some call like rbtree_init(&rbtree, &lock). Doing this in an ergonomic way is proving harder than expected, so for now use this workaround. Why is creating the bpf_spin_lock independently and associating it with the tree preferable? Because we want to be able to transfer nodes between trees atomically, and for this to work need same lock associated with 2 trees. Further locking-related patches will make it possible for the lock to be used in BPF programs and add code which enforces that the lock is held when doing any operation on the tree. Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> --- include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 7 +++++++ kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 3 +++ kernel/bpf/rbtree.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 7 +++++++ 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+)