5ffa25502b
This adds two atomic opcodes, both of which include the BPF_FETCH flag. XCHG without the BPF_FETCH flag would naturally encode atomic_set. This is not supported because it would be of limited value to userspace (it doesn't imply any barriers). CMPXCHG without BPF_FETCH woulud be an atomic compare-and-write. We don't have such an operation in the kernel so it isn't provided to BPF either. There are two significant design decisions made for the CMPXCHG instruction: - To solve the issue that this operation fundamentally has 3 operands, but we only have two register fields. Therefore the operand we compare against (the kernel's API calls it 'old') is hard-coded to be R0. x86 has similar design (and A64 doesn't have this problem). A potential alternative might be to encode the other operand's register number in the immediate field. - The kernel's atomic_cmpxchg returns the old value, while the C11 userspace APIs return a boolean indicating the comparison result. Which should BPF do? A64 returns the old value. x86 returns the old value in the hard-coded register (and also sets a flag). That means return-old-value is easier to JIT, so that's what we use. Signed-off-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210114181751.768687-8-jackmanb@google.com |
||
|---|---|---|
| .. | ||
| asm | ||
| asm-generic | ||
| linux | ||
| nolibc | ||
| tools | ||
| trace/events | ||
| uapi | ||
| vdso | ||