diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst')
| -rw-r--r-- | Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst | 111 |
1 files changed, 104 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst index 2df7b067ab93..eb19c945f4d5 100644 --- a/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst +++ b/Documentation/bpf/bpf_design_QA.rst @@ -140,11 +140,6 @@ A: Because if we picked one-to-one relationship to x64 it would have made it more complicated to support on arm64 and other archs. Also it needs div-by-zero runtime check. -Q: Why there is no BPF_SDIV for signed divide operation? -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -A: Because it would be rarely used. llvm errors in such case and -prints a suggestion to use unsigned divide instead. - Q: Why BPF has implicit prologue and epilogue? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A: Because architectures like sparc have register windows and in general @@ -208,6 +203,22 @@ data structures and compile with kernel internal headers. Both of these kernel internals are subject to change and can break with newer kernels such that the program needs to be adapted accordingly. +New BPF functionality is generally added through the use of kfuncs instead of +new helpers. Kfuncs are not considered part of the stable API, and have their own +lifecycle expectations as described in :ref:`BPF_kfunc_lifecycle_expectations`. + +Q: Are tracepoints part of the stable ABI? +------------------------------------------ +A: NO. Tracepoints are tied to internal implementation details hence they are +subject to change and can break with newer kernels. BPF programs need to change +accordingly when this happens. + +Q: Are places where kprobes can attach part of the stable ABI? +-------------------------------------------------------------- +A: NO. The places to which kprobes can attach are internal implementation +details, which means that they are subject to change and can break with +newer kernels. BPF programs need to change accordingly when this happens. + Q: How much stack space a BPF program uses? ------------------------------------------- A: Currently all program types are limited to 512 bytes of stack @@ -224,8 +235,8 @@ A: NO. Classic BPF programs are converted into extend BPF instructions. Q: Can BPF call arbitrary kernel functions? ------------------------------------------- -A: NO. BPF programs can only call a set of helper functions which -is defined for every program type. +A: NO. BPF programs can only call specific functions exposed as BPF helpers or +kfuncs. The set of available functions is defined for every program type. Q: Can BPF overwrite arbitrary kernel memory? --------------------------------------------- @@ -251,4 +262,90 @@ Q: New functionality via kernel modules? Q: Can BPF functionality such as new program or map types, new helpers, etc be added out of kernel module code? +A: Yes, through kfuncs and kptrs + +The core BPF functionality such as program types, maps and helpers cannot be +added to by modules. However, modules can expose functionality to BPF programs +by exporting kfuncs (which may return pointers to module-internal data +structures as kptrs). + +Q: Directly calling kernel function is an ABI? +---------------------------------------------- +Q: Some kernel functions (e.g. tcp_slow_start) can be called +by BPF programs. Do these kernel functions become an ABI? + A: NO. + +The kernel function protos will change and the bpf programs will be +rejected by the verifier. Also, for example, some of the bpf-callable +kernel functions have already been used by other kernel tcp +cc (congestion-control) implementations. If any of these kernel +functions has changed, both the in-tree and out-of-tree kernel tcp cc +implementations have to be changed. The same goes for the bpf +programs and they have to be adjusted accordingly. See +:ref:`BPF_kfunc_lifecycle_expectations` for details. + +Q: Attaching to arbitrary kernel functions is an ABI? +----------------------------------------------------- +Q: BPF programs can be attached to many kernel functions. Do these +kernel functions become part of the ABI? + +A: NO. + +The kernel function prototypes will change, and BPF programs attaching to +them will need to change. The BPF compile-once-run-everywhere (CO-RE) +should be used in order to make it easier to adapt your BPF programs to +different versions of the kernel. + +Q: Marking a function with BTF_ID makes that function an ABI? +------------------------------------------------------------- +A: NO. + +The BTF_ID macro does not cause a function to become part of the ABI +any more than does the EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL macro. + +Q: What is the compatibility story for special BPF types in map values? +----------------------------------------------------------------------- +Q: Users are allowed to embed bpf_spin_lock, bpf_timer fields in their BPF map +values (when using BTF support for BPF maps). This allows to use helpers for +such objects on these fields inside map values. Users are also allowed to embed +pointers to some kernel types (with __kptr_untrusted and __kptr BTF tags). Will the +kernel preserve backwards compatibility for these features? + +A: It depends. For bpf_spin_lock, bpf_timer: YES, for kptr and everything else: +NO, but see below. + +For struct types that have been added already, like bpf_spin_lock and bpf_timer, +the kernel will preserve backwards compatibility, as they are part of UAPI. + +For kptrs, they are also part of UAPI, but only with respect to the kptr +mechanism. The types that you can use with a __kptr_untrusted and __kptr tagged +pointer in your struct are NOT part of the UAPI contract. The supported types can +and will change across kernel releases. However, operations like accessing kptr +fields and bpf_kptr_xchg() helper will continue to be supported across kernel +releases for the supported types. + +For any other supported struct type, unless explicitly stated in this document +and added to bpf.h UAPI header, such types can and will arbitrarily change their +size, type, and alignment, or any other user visible API or ABI detail across +kernel releases. The users must adapt their BPF programs to the new changes and +update them to make sure their programs continue to work correctly. + +NOTE: BPF subsystem specially reserves the 'bpf\_' prefix for type names, in +order to introduce more special fields in the future. Hence, user programs must +avoid defining types with 'bpf\_' prefix to not be broken in future releases. +In other words, no backwards compatibility is guaranteed if one using a type +in BTF with 'bpf\_' prefix. + +Q: What is the compatibility story for special BPF types in allocated objects? +------------------------------------------------------------------------------ +Q: Same as above, but for allocated objects (i.e. objects allocated using +bpf_obj_new for user defined types). Will the kernel preserve backwards +compatibility for these features? + +A: NO. + +Unlike map value types, the API to work with allocated objects and any support +for special fields inside them is exposed through kfuncs, and thus has the same +lifecycle expectations as the kfuncs themselves. See +:ref:`BPF_kfunc_lifecycle_expectations` for details. |