diff --git a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.md b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.md
index 769d8ea0096..8e7cf508ccf 100644
--- a/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.md
+++ b/gcc/config/bpf/bpf.md
@@ -165,6 +165,16 @@
   "div<msuffix>\t%0,%2"
   [(set_attr "type" "<mtype>")])
 
+;; However, xBPF does provide a signed division operator, sdiv.
+
+(define_insn "div<AM:mode>3"
+  [(set (match_operand:AM 0 "register_operand" "=r,r")
+        (div:AM (match_operand:AM 1 "register_operand" " 0,0")
+                (match_operand:AM 2 "reg_or_imm_operand" "r,I")))]
+  "TARGET_XBPF"
+  "sdiv<msuffix>\t%0,%2"
+  [(set_attr "type" "<mtype>")])
+
 ;;; Modulus
 
 ;; Note that eBPF doesn't provide instructions for signed integer
@@ -178,6 +188,16 @@
   "mod<msuffix>\t%0,%2"
   [(set_attr "type" "<mtype>")])
 
+;; Again, xBPF provides a signed version, smod.
+
+(define_insn "mod<AM:mode>3"
+  [(set (match_operand:AM 0 "register_operand" "=r,r")
+        (mod:AM (match_operand:AM 1 "register_operand" " 0,0")
+                (match_operand:AM 2 "reg_or_imm_operand" "r,I")))]
+  "TARGET_XBPF"
+  "smod<msuffix>\t%0,%2"
+  [(set_attr "type" "<mtype>")])
+
 ;;; Logical AND
 (define_insn "and<AM:mode>3"
   [(set (match_operand:AM 0 "register_operand" "=r,r")
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-sdiv.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-sdiv.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..db0c494a789
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-sdiv.c
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+/* Verify signed division does not produce 'sdiv' insn in eBPF.  */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0" } */
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+  signed int x = 5;
+  signed int y = 2;
+  signed int z = x / y;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "sdiv(32)?\t%r" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-smod.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-smod.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..20234ee39cc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/diag-smod.c
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@
+/* Verify signed modulo does not produce 'smod' insn in eBPF.  */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0" } */
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+  signed int x = 5;
+  signed int y = 2;
+  signed int z = x % y;
+}
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler-not "smod(32)?\t%r" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-sdiv-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-sdiv-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..f6c5c9e9f1c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-sdiv-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+/* Verify that sdiv instruction is used for xBPF. */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0 -mxbpf" } */
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+  signed int x = 5;
+  signed int y = 2;
+  signed int z = x / y;
+  signed int w = x / 3;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "sdiv(32)?\t%r" } } */
diff --git a/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-smod-1.c b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-smod-1.c
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..b3e5816b5cf
--- /dev/null
+++ b/gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/bpf/xbpf-smod-1.c
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+/* Verify that smod instruction is used for xBPF. */
+/* { dg-do compile } */
+/* { dg-options "-O0 -mxbpf" } */
+
+void
+foo ()
+{
+  signed int x = 5;
+  signed int y = 2;
+  signed int z = x % y;
+  signed int w = x % 3;
+}
+
+/* { dg-final { scan-assembler "smod(32)?\t%r" } } */