public inbox for gcc-bugs@sourceware.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug target/114523] bpf: ssa-phiopt optimization generates unverifiable code.
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 19:17:00 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-114523-4-36j41EvV1D@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-114523-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>

https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=114523

Jose E. Marchesi <jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
     Ever confirmed|0                           |1
             Status|RESOLVED                    |NEW
         Resolution|INVALID                     |---
                 CC|                            |jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org
   Last reconfirmed|                            |2024-03-28

--- Comment #9 from Jose E. Marchesi <jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org> ---
Please do not close this bug.  We are well aware this is a limitation in the
kernel verifier, but we need to keep track of this.

In general, like in this case, many of the problems related to unverifiable
generated code can be reduced to "this is a kernel verifier bug, make it
smarter", but that doesn't mean we can't put workarounds in the back-end so we
can actually compile actually-existing BPF programs (such as that systemd
utility) in actually-existing current kernels.  That includes disabling certain
optimizations.  I don't like it any more than you do, trust me on that.

Note that the development of the BPF backends, in both clang and GCC, are by
necessity very much in lock-step with the kernel BPF support.  So this is not
something we will forget to "undo" as soon as the verifier can handle these
instructions.  Very likely we will be doing the kernel patch as well.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-03-28 19:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-03-28 17:45 [Bug target/114523] New: " cupertino.miranda at oracle dot com
2024-03-28 17:50 ` [Bug target/114523] " pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 17:52 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 17:58 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 18:05 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 18:09 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 18:13 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 18:20 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 18:26 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 19:17 ` jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org [this message]
2024-03-28 19:29 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 19:31 ` pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 21:01 ` [Bug target/114523] bpf: unverifable code due to subreg usage pinskia at gcc dot gnu.org
2024-03-28 21:06 ` jemarch at gcc dot gnu.org

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=bug-114523-4-36j41EvV1D@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ \
    --to=gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org \
    /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;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).