The bpf_rbtree_{remove,left,right} requires the root's lock to be held.
They also check the node_internal->owner is still owned by that root
before proceeding, so it is safe to allow refcounted bpf_rb_node
pointer to be used in these kfuncs.
In a bpf fq implementation which is much closer to the kernel fq,
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250418224652.105998-13-martin.lau@linux.dev/,
a networking flow (allocated by bpf_obj_new) can be added to two different
rbtrees. There are cases that the flow is searched from one rbtree,
held the refcount of the flow, and then removed from another rbtree:
struct fq_flow {
struct bpf_rb_node fq_node;
struct bpf_rb_node rate_node;
struct bpf_refcount refcount;
unsigned long sk_long;
};
int bpf_fq_enqueue(...)
{
/* ... */
bpf_spin_lock(&root->lock);
while (can_loop) {
/* ... */
if (!p)
break;
gc_f = bpf_rb_entry(p, struct fq_flow, fq_node);
if (gc_f->sk_long == sk_long) {
f = bpf_refcount_acquire(gc_f);
break;
}
/* ... */
}
bpf_spin_unlock(&root->lock);
if (f) {
bpf_spin_lock(&q->lock);
bpf_rbtree_remove(&q->delayed, &f->rate_node);
bpf_spin_unlock(&q->lock);
}
}
bpf_rbtree_{left,right} do not need this change but are relaxed together
with bpf_rbtree_remove instead of adding extra verifier logic
to exclude these kfuncs.
To avoid bi-sect failure, this patch also changes the selftests together.
The "rbtree_api_remove_unadded_node" is not expecting verifier's error.
The test now expects bpf_rbtree_remove(&groot, &m->node) to return NULL.
The test uses __retval(0) to ensure this NULL return value.
Some of the "only take non-owning..." failure messages are changed also.
Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250506015857.817950-5-martin.lau@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2ddef1783c