On Tue, Jan 20, 2026 at 7:26 AM Leon Hwang <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> To support the extended BPF syscall introduced in the previous commit,
> introduce the following internal APIs:
>
> * 'sys_bpf_ext()'
> * 'sys_bpf_ext_fd()'
>   They wrap the raw 'syscall()' interface to support passing extended
>   attributes.
> * 'probe_sys_bpf_ext()'
>   Check whether current kernel supports the BPF syscall common attributes.
>
> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <[email protected]>
> ---
>  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c             | 32 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  tools/lib/bpf/features.c        |  8 ++++++++
>  tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h |  3 +++
>  3 files changed, 43 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> index 21b57a629916..ed9c6eaeb656 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
> @@ -69,6 +69,38 @@ static inline __u64 ptr_to_u64(const void *ptr)
>         return (__u64) (unsigned long) ptr;
>  }
>
> +static inline int sys_bpf_ext(enum bpf_cmd cmd, union bpf_attr *attr,
> +                             unsigned int size,
> +                             struct bpf_common_attr *attr_common,
> +                             unsigned int size_common)
> +{
> +       cmd = attr_common ? (cmd | BPF_COMMON_ATTRS) : (cmd & 
> ~BPF_COMMON_ATTRS);
> +       return syscall(__NR_bpf, cmd, attr, size, attr_common, size_common);
> +}
> +
> +static inline int sys_bpf_ext_fd(enum bpf_cmd cmd, union bpf_attr *attr,
> +                                unsigned int size,
> +                                struct bpf_common_attr *attr_common,
> +                                unsigned int size_common)
> +{
> +       int fd;
> +
> +       fd = sys_bpf_ext(cmd, attr, size, attr_common, size_common);
> +       return ensure_good_fd(fd);
> +}
> +
> +int probe_sys_bpf_ext(void)
> +{
> +       const size_t attr_sz = offsetofend(union bpf_attr, prog_token_fd);
> +       union bpf_attr attr;
> +
> +       memset(&attr, 0, attr_sz);
> +       /* This syscall() will return error always. */

I'll cite myself from the last review:

> But fd should really not be >= 0, and if it is -- it's some problem,
> so I'd return an error in that case to keep us aware, which is why I'm
> saying I'd just return inside if (fd >= 0) { }

I didn't say let's just ignore syscall return with (void) cast and
happily check errno no matter what, did I? Drop the comment, and
handle fd >= 0 case explicitly, please.

pw-bot: cr

> +       (void) syscall(__NR_bpf, BPF_PROG_LOAD | BPF_COMMON_ATTRS, &attr, 
> attr_sz, NULL,
> +                      sizeof(struct bpf_common_attr));
> +       return errno == EFAULT;
> +}
> +
>  static inline int sys_bpf(enum bpf_cmd cmd, union bpf_attr *attr,
>                           unsigned int size)
>  {
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> index b842b83e2480..e0d646a9e233 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/features.c
> @@ -506,6 +506,11 @@ static int probe_kern_arg_ctx_tag(int token_fd)
>         return probe_fd(prog_fd);
>  }
>
> +static int probe_bpf_syscall_common_attrs(int token_fd)
> +{
> +       return probe_sys_bpf_ext();
> +}
> +
>  typedef int (*feature_probe_fn)(int /* token_fd */);
>
>  static struct kern_feature_cache feature_cache;
> @@ -581,6 +586,9 @@ static struct kern_feature_desc {
>         [FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC] = {
>                 "BTF DATASEC names starting from '?'", 
> probe_kern_btf_qmark_datasec,
>         },
> +       [FEAT_BPF_SYSCALL_COMMON_ATTRS] = {
> +               "BPF syscall common attributes support", 
> probe_bpf_syscall_common_attrs,
> +       },
>  };
>
>  bool feat_supported(struct kern_feature_cache *cache, enum kern_feature_id 
> feat_id)
> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> index fc59b21b51b5..aa16be869c4f 100644
> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf_internal.h
> @@ -392,6 +392,8 @@ enum kern_feature_id {
>         FEAT_ARG_CTX_TAG,
>         /* Kernel supports '?' at the front of datasec names */
>         FEAT_BTF_QMARK_DATASEC,
> +       /* Kernel supports BPF syscall common attributes */
> +       FEAT_BPF_SYSCALL_COMMON_ATTRS,
>         __FEAT_CNT,
>  };
>
> @@ -757,4 +759,5 @@ int probe_fd(int fd);
>  #define SHA256_DWORD_SIZE SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH / sizeof(__u64)
>
>  void libbpf_sha256(const void *data, size_t len, __u8 
> out[SHA256_DIGEST_LENGTH]);
> +int probe_sys_bpf_ext(void);
>  #endif /* __LIBBPF_LIBBPF_INTERNAL_H */
> --
> 2.52.0
>

Reply via email to