diff mbox series

[bpf-next,1/2] bpf: Mark bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}() helpers with notrace correctly

Message ID 20240207070102.335167-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit 178c54666f9c4d2f49f2ea661d0c11b52f0ed190
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series [bpf-next,1/2] bpf: Mark bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}() helpers with notrace correctly | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR success PR summary
netdev/series_format success Single patches do not need cover letters
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/ynl success Generated files up to date; no warnings/errors; no diff in generated;
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 2389 this patch: 2389
netdev/build_tools success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers fail 1 blamed authors not CCed: peterz@infradead.org; 9 maintainers not CCed: peterz@infradead.org jolsa@kernel.org john.fastabend@gmail.com martin.lau@linux.dev song@kernel.org sdf@google.com eddyz87@gmail.com kpsingh@kernel.org haoluo@google.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 1107 this patch: 1107
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success Fixes tag looks correct
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 2469 this patch: 2469
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: function definition argument '__BPF_DECL_REGS' should also have an identifier name WARNING: function definition argument '__BPF_N' should also have an identifier name WARNING: line length of 81 exceeds 80 columns
netdev/build_clang_rust success No Rust files in patch. Skipping build
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat / veristat on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-39 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_cpuv4, false, 360) / test_progs_cpuv4 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-40 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-41 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for Lint
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for Validate matrix.py
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for Unittests
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build / build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build / build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 success Logs for s390x-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-18 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-42 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-17 and -O2 optimization

Commit Message

Yonghong Song Feb. 7, 2024, 7:01 a.m. UTC 
Currently tracing is supposed not to allow for bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}()
helper calls. This is to prevent deadlock for the following cases:
  - there is a prog (prog-A) calling bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
  - there is a tracing program (prog-B), e.g., fentry, attached
    to bpf_spin_lock() and/or bpf_spin_unlock().
  - prog-B calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
For such a case, when prog-A calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}(),
a deadlock will happen.

The related source codes are below in kernel/bpf/helpers.c:
  notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
  notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
notrace is supposed to prevent fentry prog from attaching to
bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().

But actually this is not the case and fentry prog can successfully
attached to bpf_spin_lock(). Siddharth Chintamaneni reported
the issue in [1]. The following is the macro definition for
above BPF_CALL_1:
  #define BPF_CALL_x(x, name, ...)                                               \
        static __always_inline                                                 \
        u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__));   \
        typedef u64 (*btf_##name)(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__)); \
        u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));         \
        u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))          \
        {                                                                      \
                return ((btf_##name)____##name)(__BPF_MAP(x,__BPF_CAST,__BPF_N,__VA_ARGS__));\
        }                                                                      \
        static __always_inline                                                 \
        u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__))

  #define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)   BPF_CALL_x(1, name, __VA_ARGS__)

The notrace attribute is actually applied to the static always_inline function
____bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}(). The actual callback function
bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}() is not marked with notrace, hence
allowing fentry prog to attach to two helpers, and this
may cause the above mentioned deadlock. Siddharth Chintamaneni
actually has a reproducer in [2].

To fix the issue, a new macro NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1 is introduced which
will add notrace attribute to the original function instead of
the hidden always_inline function and this fixed the problem.

  [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAE5sdEigPnoGrzN8WU7Tx-h-iFuMZgW06qp0KHWtpvoXxf1OAQ@mail.gmail.com/
  [2] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAE5sdEg6yUc_Jz50AnUXEEUh6O73yQ1Z6NV2srJnef0ZrQkZew@mail.gmail.com/

Fixes: d83525ca62cf ("bpf: introduce bpf_spin_lock")
Cc: Siddharth Chintamaneni <sidchintamaneni@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
---
 include/linux/filter.h | 21 ++++++++++++---------
 kernel/bpf/helpers.c   |  4 ++--
 2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

Comments

Jiri Olsa Feb. 7, 2024, 9:29 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Tue, Feb 06, 2024 at 11:01:02PM -0800, Yonghong Song wrote:
> Currently tracing is supposed not to allow for bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}()
> helper calls. This is to prevent deadlock for the following cases:
>   - there is a prog (prog-A) calling bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
>   - there is a tracing program (prog-B), e.g., fentry, attached
>     to bpf_spin_lock() and/or bpf_spin_unlock().
>   - prog-B calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
> For such a case, when prog-A calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}(),
> a deadlock will happen.
> 
> The related source codes are below in kernel/bpf/helpers.c:
>   notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
>   notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
> notrace is supposed to prevent fentry prog from attaching to
> bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
> 
> But actually this is not the case and fentry prog can successfully
> attached to bpf_spin_lock(). Siddharth Chintamaneni reported
> the issue in [1]. The following is the macro definition for
> above BPF_CALL_1:
>   #define BPF_CALL_x(x, name, ...)                                               \
>         static __always_inline                                                 \
>         u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__));   \
>         typedef u64 (*btf_##name)(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__)); \
>         u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));         \
>         u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))          \
>         {                                                                      \
>                 return ((btf_##name)____##name)(__BPF_MAP(x,__BPF_CAST,__BPF_N,__VA_ARGS__));\
>         }                                                                      \
>         static __always_inline                                                 \
>         u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__))
> 
>   #define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)   BPF_CALL_x(1, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> 
> The notrace attribute is actually applied to the static always_inline function
> ____bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}(). The actual callback function
> bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}() is not marked with notrace, hence
> allowing fentry prog to attach to two helpers, and this
> may cause the above mentioned deadlock. Siddharth Chintamaneni
> actually has a reproducer in [2].
> 
> To fix the issue, a new macro NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1 is introduced which
> will add notrace attribute to the original function instead of
> the hidden always_inline function and this fixed the problem.
> 
>   [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAE5sdEigPnoGrzN8WU7Tx-h-iFuMZgW06qp0KHWtpvoXxf1OAQ@mail.gmail.com/
>   [2] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAE5sdEg6yUc_Jz50AnUXEEUh6O73yQ1Z6NV2srJnef0ZrQkZew@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> Fixes: d83525ca62cf ("bpf: introduce bpf_spin_lock")
> Cc: Siddharth Chintamaneni <sidchintamaneni@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>

Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>

jirka

> ---
>  include/linux/filter.h | 21 ++++++++++++---------
>  kernel/bpf/helpers.c   |  4 ++--
>  2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
> index fee070b9826e..36cc29a2934c 100644
> --- a/include/linux/filter.h
> +++ b/include/linux/filter.h
> @@ -547,24 +547,27 @@ static inline bool insn_is_zext(const struct bpf_insn *insn)
>  	__BPF_MAP(n, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_N, u64, __ur_1, u64, __ur_2,       \
>  		  u64, __ur_3, u64, __ur_4, u64, __ur_5)
>  
> -#define BPF_CALL_x(x, name, ...)					       \
> +#define BPF_CALL_x(x, attr, name, ...)					       \
>  	static __always_inline						       \
>  	u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__));   \
>  	typedef u64 (*btf_##name)(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__)); \
> -	u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));	       \
> -	u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))	       \
> +	attr u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));    \
> +	attr u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))     \
>  	{								       \
>  		return ((btf_##name)____##name)(__BPF_MAP(x,__BPF_CAST,__BPF_N,__VA_ARGS__));\
>  	}								       \
>  	static __always_inline						       \
>  	u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__))
>  
> -#define BPF_CALL_0(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(0, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> -#define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> -#define BPF_CALL_2(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(2, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> -#define BPF_CALL_3(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(3, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> -#define BPF_CALL_4(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(4, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> -#define BPF_CALL_5(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(5, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define __NOATTR
> +#define BPF_CALL_0(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(0, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define BPF_CALL_2(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(2, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define BPF_CALL_3(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(3, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define BPF_CALL_4(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(4, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +#define BPF_CALL_5(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(5, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
> +
> +#define NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, notrace, name, __VA_ARGS__)
>  
>  #define bpf_ctx_range(TYPE, MEMBER)						\
>  	offsetof(TYPE, MEMBER) ... offsetofend(TYPE, MEMBER) - 1
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> index 4db1c658254c..87136e27a99a 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> @@ -334,7 +334,7 @@ static inline void __bpf_spin_lock_irqsave(struct bpf_spin_lock *lock)
>  	__this_cpu_write(irqsave_flags, flags);
>  }
>  
> -notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
> +NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
>  {
>  	__bpf_spin_lock_irqsave(lock);
>  	return 0;
> @@ -357,7 +357,7 @@ static inline void __bpf_spin_unlock_irqrestore(struct bpf_spin_lock *lock)
>  	local_irq_restore(flags);
>  }
>  
> -notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
> +NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
>  {
>  	__bpf_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock);
>  	return 0;
> -- 
> 2.34.1
> 
>
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf@kernel.org Feb. 13, 2024, 7:20 p.m. UTC | #2 
Hello:

This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master)
by Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>:

On Tue,  6 Feb 2024 23:01:02 -0800 you wrote:
> Currently tracing is supposed not to allow for bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}()
> helper calls. This is to prevent deadlock for the following cases:
>   - there is a prog (prog-A) calling bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
>   - there is a tracing program (prog-B), e.g., fentry, attached
>     to bpf_spin_lock() and/or bpf_spin_unlock().
>   - prog-B calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}().
> For such a case, when prog-A calls bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}(),
> a deadlock will happen.
> 
> [...]

Here is the summary with links:
  - [bpf-next,1/2] bpf: Mark bpf_spin_{lock,unlock}() helpers with notrace correctly
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/178c54666f9c
  - [bpf-next,2/2] selftests/bpf: Ensure fentry prog cannot attach to bpf_spin_{lock,unlcok}()
    https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/fc1c9e40da37

You are awesome, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/include/linux/filter.h b/include/linux/filter.h
index fee070b9826e..36cc29a2934c 100644
--- a/include/linux/filter.h
+++ b/include/linux/filter.h
@@ -547,24 +547,27 @@  static inline bool insn_is_zext(const struct bpf_insn *insn)
 	__BPF_MAP(n, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_N, u64, __ur_1, u64, __ur_2,       \
 		  u64, __ur_3, u64, __ur_4, u64, __ur_5)
 
-#define BPF_CALL_x(x, name, ...)					       \
+#define BPF_CALL_x(x, attr, name, ...)					       \
 	static __always_inline						       \
 	u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__));   \
 	typedef u64 (*btf_##name)(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__)); \
-	u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));	       \
-	u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))	       \
+	attr u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__));    \
+	attr u64 name(__BPF_REG(x, __BPF_DECL_REGS, __BPF_N, __VA_ARGS__))     \
 	{								       \
 		return ((btf_##name)____##name)(__BPF_MAP(x,__BPF_CAST,__BPF_N,__VA_ARGS__));\
 	}								       \
 	static __always_inline						       \
 	u64 ____##name(__BPF_MAP(x, __BPF_DECL_ARGS, __BPF_V, __VA_ARGS__))
 
-#define BPF_CALL_0(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(0, name, __VA_ARGS__)
-#define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, name, __VA_ARGS__)
-#define BPF_CALL_2(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(2, name, __VA_ARGS__)
-#define BPF_CALL_3(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(3, name, __VA_ARGS__)
-#define BPF_CALL_4(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(4, name, __VA_ARGS__)
-#define BPF_CALL_5(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(5, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define __NOATTR
+#define BPF_CALL_0(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(0, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define BPF_CALL_2(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(2, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define BPF_CALL_3(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(3, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define BPF_CALL_4(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(4, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+#define BPF_CALL_5(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(5, __NOATTR, name, __VA_ARGS__)
+
+#define NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(name, ...)	BPF_CALL_x(1, notrace, name, __VA_ARGS__)
 
 #define bpf_ctx_range(TYPE, MEMBER)						\
 	offsetof(TYPE, MEMBER) ... offsetofend(TYPE, MEMBER) - 1
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
index 4db1c658254c..87136e27a99a 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
@@ -334,7 +334,7 @@  static inline void __bpf_spin_lock_irqsave(struct bpf_spin_lock *lock)
 	__this_cpu_write(irqsave_flags, flags);
 }
 
-notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
+NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_lock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
 {
 	__bpf_spin_lock_irqsave(lock);
 	return 0;
@@ -357,7 +357,7 @@  static inline void __bpf_spin_unlock_irqrestore(struct bpf_spin_lock *lock)
 	local_irq_restore(flags);
 }
 
-notrace BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
+NOTRACE_BPF_CALL_1(bpf_spin_unlock, struct bpf_spin_lock *, lock)
 {
 	__bpf_spin_unlock_irqrestore(lock);
 	return 0;