From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
"Andrii Nakryiko" <andrii@kernel.org>,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
"KP Singh" <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@kernel.org>,
"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <brouer@redhat.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/3] libbpf: add low level TC-BPF API
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 23:55:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9985fe91-76ea-7c09-c285-1006168f1c27@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210427180202.pepa2wdbhhap3vyg@apollo>
On 4/27/21 8:02 PM, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2021 at 08:34:30PM IST, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 4/23/21 5:05 PM, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
[...]
>>> +/*
>>> + * @ctx: Can be NULL, if not, must point to a valid object.
>>> + * If the qdisc was attached during ctx_init, it will be deleted if no
>>> + * filters are attached to it.
>>> + * When ctx == NULL, this is a no-op.
>>> + */
>>> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_ctx_destroy(struct bpf_tc_ctx *ctx);
>>> +/*
>>> + * @ctx: Cannot be NULL.
>>> + * @fd: Must be >= 0.
>>> + * @opts: Cannot be NULL, prog_id must be unset, all other fields can be
>>> + * optionally set. All fields except replace will be set as per created
>>> + * filter's attributes. parent must only be set when attach_point of ctx is
>>> + * BPF_TC_CUSTOM_PARENT, otherwise parent must be unset.
>>> + *
>>> + * Fills the following fields in opts:
>>> + * handle
>>> + * parent
>>> + * priority
>>> + * prog_id
>>> + */
>>> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_attach(struct bpf_tc_ctx *ctx, int fd,
>>> + struct bpf_tc_opts *opts);
>>> +/*
>>> + * @ctx: Cannot be NULL.
>>> + * @opts: Cannot be NULL, replace and prog_id must be unset, all other fields
>>> + * must be set.
>>> + */
>>> +LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_detach(struct bpf_tc_ctx *ctx,
>>> + const struct bpf_tc_opts *opts);
>>
>> One thing that I find a bit odd from this API is that BPF_TC_INGRESS / BPF_TC_EGRESS
>> needs to be set each time via bpf_tc_ctx_init(). So whenever a specific program would
>> be attached to both we need to 're-init' in between just to change from hook a to b,
>> whereas when you have BPF_TC_CUSTOM_PARENT, you could just use a different opts->parent
>> without going this detour (unless the clsact wasn't loaded there in the first place).
>
> Currently I check that opts->parent is unset when BPF_TC_INGRESS or BPF_TC_EGRESS
> is set as attach point. But since both map to clsact, we could allow the user to
> specify opts->parent as BPF_TC_INGRESS or BPF_TC_EGRESS (no need to use
> TC_H_MAKE, we can detect it from ctx->parent that it won't be a parent id). This
> would mean that by default attach point is what you set for ctx, but for
> bpf_tc_attach you can temporarily override to be some other attach point (for
> the same qdisc). You still won't be able to set anything other than the two
> though.
I think the assumption on auto-detecting the parent id in that case might not hold given
major number could very well be 0. Wrt BPF_TC_UNSPEC ... maybe it's not even needed, back
to drawing board ...
Here's how the whole API could look like, usage examples below:
enum bpf_tc_attach_point {
BPF_TC_INGRESS = 1 << 0,
BPF_TC_EGRESS = 1 << 1,
BPF_TC_CUSTOM = 1 << 2,
};
enum bpf_tc_attach_flags {
BPF_TC_F_REPLACE = 1 << 0,
};
struct bpf_tc_hook {
size_t sz;
int ifindex;
enum bpf_tc_attach_point which;
__u32 parent;
size_t :0;
};
struct bpf_tc_opts {
size_t sz;
__u32 handle;
__u16 priority;
union {
int prog_fd;
__u32 prog_id;
};
size_t :0;
};
LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_hook_create(struct bpf_tc_hook *hook);
LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_hook_destroy(struct bpf_tc_hook *hook);
LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_attach(const struct bpf_tc_hook *hook, const struct bpf_tc_opts *opts, int flags);
LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_detach(const struct bpf_tc_hook *hook, const struct bpf_tc_opts *opts);
LIBBPF_API int bpf_tc_query(const struct bpf_tc_hook *hook, struct bpf_tc_opts *opts);
So a user could do just:
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, hook, .ifindex = 42, .which = BPF_TC_INGRESS);
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_opts, opts, .handle = 1, .priority = 1, .prog_fd = fd);
err = bpf_tc_attach(&hook, &opts, BPF_TC_F_REPLACE);
[...]
If it's not known whether the hook exists, then a preceding call to:
err = bpf_tc_hook_create(&hook);
[...]
The bpf_tc_query() would look like:
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, hook, .ifindex = 42, .which = BPF_TC_EGRESS);
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_opts, opts, .handle = 1, .priority = 1);
err = bpf_tc_query(&hook, &opts);
if (!err) {
[...] // gives access to: opts.prog_id
}
The bpf_tc_detach():
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, hook, .ifindex = 42, .which = BPF_TC_INGRESS);
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_opts, opts, .handle = 1, .priority = 1);
err = bpf_tc_detach(&hook, &opts);
[...]
The nice thing would be that hook and opts are kept semantically separate, meaning with
hook you can iterate though a bunch of devs and ingress/egress locations without changing
opts, whereas with opts you could iterate on the cls_bpf instance itself w/o changing
hook. Both are kept extensible via DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS().
Now the bpf_tc_hook_destroy() one:
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_tc_hook, hook, .ifindex = 42, .which = BPF_TC_INGRESS|BPF_TC_EGRESS);
err = bpf_tc_hook_destroy(&hook, &opts);
[...]
For triggering a remove of the clsact qdisc on the device, both directions are passed in.
Combining both is only ever allowed for bpf_tc_hook_destroy().
If /only/ BPF_TC_INGRESS or only BPF_TC_EGRESS is passed, it could flush their lists (aka
equivalent of `tc filter del dev eth0 ingress` and `tc filter del dev eth0 egress` command).
For bpf_tc_hook_{create,destroy}() with BPF_TC_CUSTOM, we just return -EINVAL or -EOPNOTSUPP.
I think the above interface would work nicely and feels intuitive while being extensible.
Thoughts?
Thanks,
Daniel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-27 21:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-23 15:05 [PATCH bpf-next v4 0/3] Add TC-BPF API Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-23 15:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/3] libbpf: add helpers for preparing netlink attributes Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-23 15:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/3] libbpf: add low level TC-BPF API Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-27 15:04 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-04-27 18:00 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-27 18:02 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-27 18:15 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-27 21:55 ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2021-04-27 22:05 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-04-27 22:32 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-04-27 22:36 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-27 22:40 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-04-27 22:51 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-27 23:14 ` Daniel Borkmann
2021-04-27 23:19 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-27 20:36 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-04-23 15:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 3/3] libbpf: add selftests for " Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2021-04-27 21:50 ` 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=9985fe91-76ea-7c09-c285-1006168f1c27@iogearbox.net \
--to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=toke@redhat.com \
--cc=yhs@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).