From: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
<ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: <kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 8/9] libbpf: add opt-in strict BPF program section name handling logic
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2021 12:43:47 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0ce9822b-0e49-284e-e999-9b473ebc86b9@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210922234113.1965663-9-andrii@kernel.org>
On 9/22/21 7:41 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Implement strict ELF section name handling for BPF programs. It utilizes
> `libbpf_set_strict_mode()` framework and adds new flag: LIBBPF_STRICT_SEC_NAME.
>
> If this flag is set, libbpf will enforce exact section name matching for
> a lot of program types that previously allowed just partial prefix
> match. E.g., if previously SEC("xdp_whatever_i_want") was allowed, now
> in strict mode only SEC("xdp") will be accepted, which makes SEC("")
> definitions cleaner and more structured. SEC() now won't be used as yet
> another way to uniquely encode BPF program identifier (for that
> C function name is better and is guaranteed to be unique within
> bpf_object). Now SEC() is strictly BPF program type and, depending on
> program type, extra load/attach parameter specification.
>
> Libbpf completely supports multiple BPF programs in the same ELF
> section, so multiple BPF programs of the same type/specification easily
> co-exist together within the same bpf_object scope.
>
> Additionally, a new (for now internal) convention is introduced: section
> name that can be a stand-alone exact BPF program type specificator, but
> also could have extra parameters after '/' delimiter. An example of such
> section is "struct_ops", which can be specified by itself, but also
> allows to specify the intended operation to be attached to, e.g.,
> "struct_ops/dctcp_init". Note, that "struct_ops_some_op" is not allowed.
> Such section definition is specified as "struct_ops+".
>
> This change is part of libbpf 1.0 effort ([0], [1]).
>
> [0] Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/issues/271
> [1] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/wiki/Libbpf:-the-road-to-v1.0#stricter-and-more-uniform-bpf-program-section-name-sec-handling
>
> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
> ---
Acked-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-23 16:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-22 23:41 [PATCH v3 bpf-next 0/9] libbpf: stricter BPF program section name handling Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 1/9] selftests/bpf: normalize XDP section names in selftests Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 2/9] selftests/bpf: normalize SEC("classifier") usage Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-23 16:52 ` Dave Marchevsky
2021-09-27 15:14 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-09-27 16:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2021-09-28 1:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 3/9] selftests/bpf: normalize all the rest SEC() uses Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 4/9] libbpf: refactor internal sec_def handling to enable pluggability Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 5/9] libbpf: reduce reliance of attach_fns on sec_def internals Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 6/9] libbpf: refactor ELF section handler definitions Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-23 17:21 ` Dave Marchevsky
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 7/9] libbpf: complete SEC() table unification for BPF_APROG_SEC/BPF_EAPROG_SEC Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-23 20:41 ` Dave Marchevsky
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 8/9] libbpf: add opt-in strict BPF program section name handling logic Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-23 16:43 ` Dave Marchevsky [this message]
2021-09-22 23:41 ` [PATCH v3 bpf-next 9/9] selftests/bpf: switch sk_lookup selftests to strict SEC("sk_lookup") use Andrii Nakryiko
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=0ce9822b-0e49-284e-e999-9b473ebc86b9@fb.com \
--to=davemarchevsky@fb.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).