From: Stefan Metzmacher <metze@samba.org>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@kernel.dk>,
io-uring@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Caleb Sander Mateos <csander@purestorage.com>,
Akilesh Kailash <akailash@google.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] io_uring: bpf: extend io_uring with bpf struct_ops
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2025 11:32:56 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <94f94f0e-7086-4f44-a658-9cb3b5496faf@samba.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251104162123.1086035-4-ming.lei@redhat.com>
Hi Ming,
> io_uring can be extended with bpf struct_ops in the following ways:
>
> 1) add new io_uring operation from application
> - one typical use case is for operating device zero-copy buffer, which
> belongs to kernel, and not visible or too expensive to export to
> userspace, such as supporting copy data from this buffer to userspace,
> decompressing data to zero-copy buffer in Android case[1][2], or
> checksum/decrypting.
>
> [1] https://lpc.events/event/18/contributions/1710/attachments/1440/3070/LPC2024_ublk_zero_copy.pdf
>
> 2) extend 64 byte SQE, since bpf map can be used to store IO data
> conveniently
>
> 3) communicate in IO chain, since bpf map can be shared among IOs,
> when one bpf IO is completed, data can be written to IO chain wide
> bpf map, then the following bpf IO can retrieve the data from this bpf
> map, this way is more flexible than io_uring built-in buffer
>
> 4) pretty handy to inject error for test purpose
>
> bpf struct_ops is one very handy way to attach bpf prog with kernel, and
> this patch simply wires existed io_uring operation callbacks with added
> uring bpf struct_ops, so application can define its own uring bpf
> operations.
This sounds useful to me.
> Signed-off-by: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
> ---
> include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h | 9 ++
> io_uring/bpf.c | 271 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> io_uring/io_uring.c | 1 +
> io_uring/io_uring.h | 3 +-
> io_uring/uring_bpf.h | 30 ++++
> 5 files changed, 311 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> index b8c49813b4e5..94d2050131ac 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/io_uring.h
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ struct io_uring_sqe {
> __u32 install_fd_flags;
> __u32 nop_flags;
> __u32 pipe_flags;
> + __u32 bpf_op_flags;
> };
> __u64 user_data; /* data to be passed back at completion time */
> /* pack this to avoid bogus arm OABI complaints */
> @@ -427,6 +428,13 @@ enum io_uring_op {
> #define IORING_RECVSEND_BUNDLE (1U << 4)
> #define IORING_SEND_VECTORIZED (1U << 5)
>
> +/*
> + * sqe->bpf_op_flags top 8bits is for storing bpf op
> + * The other 24bits are used for bpf prog
> + */
> +#define IORING_BPF_OP_BITS (8)
> +#define IORING_BPF_OP_SHIFT (24)
> +
> /*
> * cqe.res for IORING_CQE_F_NOTIF if
> * IORING_SEND_ZC_REPORT_USAGE was requested
> @@ -631,6 +639,7 @@ struct io_uring_params {
> #define IORING_FEAT_MIN_TIMEOUT (1U << 15)
> #define IORING_FEAT_RW_ATTR (1U << 16)
> #define IORING_FEAT_NO_IOWAIT (1U << 17)
> +#define IORING_FEAT_BPF (1U << 18)
>
> /*
> * io_uring_register(2) opcodes and arguments
> diff --git a/io_uring/bpf.c b/io_uring/bpf.c
> index bb1e37d1e804..8227be6d5a10 100644
> --- a/io_uring/bpf.c
> +++ b/io_uring/bpf.c
> @@ -4,28 +4,95 @@
> #include <linux/kernel.h>
> #include <linux/errno.h>
> #include <uapi/linux/io_uring.h>
> +#include <linux/init.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +#include <linux/bpf_verifier.h>
> +#include <linux/bpf.h>
> +#include <linux/btf.h>
> +#include <linux/btf_ids.h>
> +#include <linux/filter.h>
> #include "io_uring.h"
> #include "uring_bpf.h"
>
> +#define MAX_BPF_OPS_COUNT (1 << IORING_BPF_OP_BITS)
> +
> static DEFINE_MUTEX(uring_bpf_ctx_lock);
> static LIST_HEAD(uring_bpf_ctx_list);
> +DEFINE_STATIC_SRCU(uring_bpf_srcu);
> +static struct uring_bpf_ops bpf_ops[MAX_BPF_OPS_COUNT];
This indicates to me that the whole system with all applications in all namespaces
need to coordinate in order to use these 256 ops?
I think in order to have something useful, this should be per
struct io_ring_ctx and each application should be able to load
its own bpf programs.
Something that uses bpf_prog_get_type() based on a bpf_fd
like SIOCKCMATTACH in net/kcm/kcmsock.c.
metze
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-13 10:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-04 16:21 [PATCH 0/5] io_uring: add IORING_OP_BPF for extending io_uring Ming Lei
2025-11-04 16:21 ` [PATCH 1/5] io_uring: prepare for extending io_uring with bpf Ming Lei
2025-12-31 1:13 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-31 9:33 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-04 16:21 ` [PATCH 2/5] io_uring: bpf: add io_uring_ctx setup for BPF into one list Ming Lei
2025-12-31 1:13 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-31 9:49 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-31 16:19 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-04 16:21 ` [PATCH 3/5] io_uring: bpf: extend io_uring with bpf struct_ops Ming Lei
2025-11-07 19:02 ` kernel test robot
2025-11-08 6:53 ` kernel test robot
2025-11-13 10:32 ` Stefan Metzmacher [this message]
2025-11-13 10:59 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-13 11:19 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2025-11-14 3:00 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-08 22:45 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-09 3:08 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-10 16:11 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-19 14:39 ` Jonathan Corbet
2025-11-20 1:46 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-20 1:51 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-31 1:19 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-31 10:32 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-31 16:48 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-04 16:21 ` [PATCH 4/5] io_uring: bpf: add buffer support for IORING_OP_BPF Ming Lei
2025-11-13 10:42 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2025-11-13 11:04 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-13 11:25 ` Stefan Metzmacher
2025-12-31 1:42 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-12-31 11:02 ` Ming Lei
2025-12-31 17:02 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-04 16:21 ` [PATCH 5/5] io_uring: bpf: add io_uring_bpf_req_memcpy() kfunc Ming Lei
2025-11-07 18:51 ` kernel test robot
2025-12-31 1:42 ` Caleb Sander Mateos
2025-11-05 12:47 ` [PATCH 0/5] io_uring: add IORING_OP_BPF for extending io_uring Pavel Begunkov
2025-11-05 15:57 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-06 16:03 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-11-07 15:54 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-11 14:07 ` Pavel Begunkov
2025-11-13 4:18 ` Ming Lei
2025-11-19 19:00 ` Pavel Begunkov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=94f94f0e-7086-4f44-a658-9cb3b5496faf@samba.org \
--to=metze@samba.org \
--cc=akailash@google.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=axboe@kernel.dk \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=csander@purestorage.com \
--cc=io-uring@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox