Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::3:7 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::3:7;
Feedback-ID: i6a694271:Fastmail
Date:   Tue, 28 Nov 2023 13:15:41 -0600
From:   Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
To:     Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Cc:     ndesaulniers@google.com, andrii@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org,
        daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org, steffen.klassert@secunet.com,
        antony.antony@secunet.com, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
        yonghong.song@linux.dev, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
        john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@google.com,
        haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, trix@redhat.com,
        bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        llvm@lists.linux.dev, devel@linux-ipsec.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next v2 3/6] libbpf: Add BPF_CORE_WRITE_BITFIELD()
 macro
Message-ID: <qcjvpbuhnj3jwbc5gb5c3tmla7scwpxuwgcqgfbvc6ewwjej3j@o7t3f6wacwps>
References: <cover.1701193577.git.dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
 <ed7920365daf5eff1c82892b57e918d3db786ac7.1701193577.git.dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
 <20c593b6f31720a3d24d75e5e5cc3245b67249d1.camel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20c593b6f31720a3d24d75e5e5cc3245b67249d1.camel@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Nov 28, 2023 at 07:59:01PM +0200, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
> On Tue, 2023-11-28 at 10:54 -0700, Daniel Xu wrote:
> > Similar to reading from CO-RE bitfields, we need a CO-RE aware bitfield
> > writing wrapper to make the verifier happy.
> > 
> > Two alternatives to this approach are:
> > 
> > 1. Use the upcoming `preserve_static_offset` [0] attribute to disable
> >    CO-RE on specific structs.
> > 2. Use broader byte-sized writes to write to bitfields.
> > 
> > (1) is a bit a bit hard to use. It requires specific and
> > not-very-obvious annotations to bpftool generated vmlinux.h. It's also
> > not generally available in released LLVM versions yet.
> > 
> > (2) makes the code quite hard to read and write. And especially if
> > BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD() is already being used, it makes more sense to
> > to have an inverse helper for writing.
> > 
> > [0]: https://reviews.llvm.org/D133361
> > From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>
> > ---
> 
> Could you please also add a selftest (or several) using __retval()
> annotation for this macro?

Sure, I'll take a look.

Thanks,
Daniel