Commits
Jiong Wang committed 5327ed3d44b
bpf: verifier: mark verified-insn with sub-register zext flag eBPF ISA specification requires high 32-bit cleared when low 32-bit sub-register is written. This applies to destination register of ALU32 etc. JIT back-ends must guarantee this semantic when doing code-gen. x86_64 and AArch64 ISA has the same semantics, so the corresponding JIT back-end doesn't need to do extra work. However, 32-bit arches (arm, x86, nfp etc.) and some other 64-bit arches (PowerPC, SPARC etc) need to do explicit zero extension to meet this requirement, otherwise code like the following will fail. u64_value = (u64) u32_value ... other uses of u64_value This is because compiler could exploit the semantic described above and save those zero extensions for extending u32_value to u64_value, these JIT back-ends are expected to guarantee this through inserting extra zero extensions which however could be a significant increase on the code size. Some benchmarks show there could be ~40% sub-register writes out of total insns, meaning at least ~40% extra code-gen. One observation is these extra zero extensions are not always necessary. Take above code snippet for example, it is possible u32_value will never be casted into a u64, the value of high 32-bit of u32_value then could be ignored and extra zero extension could be eliminated. This patch implements this idea, insns defining sub-registers will be marked when the high 32-bit of the defined sub-register matters. For those unmarked insns, it is safe to eliminate high 32-bit clearnace for them. Algo: - Split read flags into READ32 and READ64. - Record index of insn that does sub-register write. Keep the index inside reg state and update it during verifier insn walking. - A full register read on a sub-register marks its definition insn as needing zero extension on dst register. A new sub-register write overrides the old one. - When propagating read64 during path pruning, also mark any insn defining a sub-register that is read in the pruned path as full-register. Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com> Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>