linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
To: Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
	KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@google.com>,
	Joe Burton <jevburton.kernel@gmail.com>,
	Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
	joshdon@google.com, sdf@google.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/9] bpf: Add mkdir, rmdir, unlink syscalls for prog_bpf_syscall
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2022 11:13:47 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2c5669f1-b9d9-ee78-c5ee-d29a41d4d70a@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+khW7gAEL+yBmXjWO28ns5hU4oHVZrEArfepuOfy6Q1y7VDKQ@mail.gmail.com>



On 3/3/22 10:56 AM, Hao Luo wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 2, 2022 at 12:55 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2/25/22 3:43 PM, Hao Luo wrote:
>>> This patch allows bpf_syscall prog to perform some basic filesystem
>>> operations: create, remove directories and unlink files. Three bpf
>>> helpers are added for this purpose. When combined with the following
>>> patches that allow pinning and getting bpf objects from bpf prog,
>>> this feature can be used to create directory hierarchy in bpffs that
>>> help manage bpf objects purely using bpf progs.
>>>
>>> The added helpers subject to the same permission checks as their syscall
>>> version. For example, one can not write to a read-only file system;
>>> The identity of the current process is checked to see whether it has
>>> sufficient permission to perform the operations.
>>>
>>> Only directories and files in bpffs can be created or removed by these
>>> helpers. But it won't be too hard to allow these helpers to operate
>>> on files in other filesystems, if we want.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
>>> ---
>>>    include/linux/bpf.h            |   1 +
>>>    include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       |  26 +++++
>>>    kernel/bpf/inode.c             |   9 +-
>>>    kernel/bpf/syscall.c           | 177 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>>    tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |  26 +++++
>>>    5 files changed, 236 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
>>> index f19abc59b6cd..fce5e26179f5 100644
>>> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
>>> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
>>> @@ -1584,6 +1584,7 @@ int bpf_link_new_fd(struct bpf_link *link);
>>>    struct file *bpf_link_new_file(struct bpf_link *link, int *reserved_fd);
>>>    struct bpf_link *bpf_link_get_from_fd(u32 ufd);
>>>
>>> +bool bpf_path_is_bpf_dir(const struct path *path);
>>>    int bpf_obj_pin_user(u32 ufd, const char __user *pathname);
>>>    int bpf_obj_get_user(const char __user *pathname, int flags);
>>>
>>> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> index afe3d0d7f5f2..a5dbc794403d 100644
>>> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>> @@ -5086,6 +5086,29 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>>     *  Return
>>>     *          0 on success, or a negative error in case of failure. On error
>>>     *          *dst* buffer is zeroed out.
>>> + *
>>> + * long bpf_mkdir(const char *pathname, int pathname_sz, u32 mode)
>>
>> Can we make pathname_sz to be u32 instead of int? pathname_sz should
>> never be negative any way.
>>
>> Also, I think it is a good idea to add 'u64 flags' parameter for all
>> three helpers, so we have room in the future to tune for new use cases.
>>
> 
> SG. Will make this change.
> 
> Actually, I think I need to cap patthname_sz from above, to ensure
> pathname_sz isn't too big. Is that necessary? I see there are other
> helpers that don't have this type of check.

There is no need. The verifier should ensure the memory held by pathname 
will have at least size of pathname_sz.

> 
>>> + *   Description
>>> + *           Attempts to create a directory name *pathname*. The argument
>>> + *           *pathname_sz* specifies the length of the string *pathname*.
>>> + *           The argument *mode* specifies the mode for the new directory. It
>>> + *           is modified by the process's umask. It has the same semantic as
>>> + *           the syscall mkdir(2).
>>> + *   Return
>>> + *           0 on success, or a negative error in case of failure.
>>> + *
>>> + * long bpf_rmdir(const char *pathname, int pathname_sz)
>>> + *   Description
>>> + *           Deletes a directory, which must be empty.
>>> + *   Return
>>> + *           0 on sucess, or a negative error in case of failure.
>>> + *
>>> + * long bpf_unlink(const char *pathname, int pathname_sz)
>>> + *   Description
>>> + *           Deletes a name and possibly the file it refers to. It has the
>>> + *           same semantic as the syscall unlink(2).
>>> + *   Return
>>> + *           0 on success, or a negative error in case of failure.
>>>     */
>>>    #define __BPF_FUNC_MAPPER(FN)               \
>>>        FN(unspec),                     \
>>> @@ -5280,6 +5303,9 @@ union bpf_attr {
>>>        FN(xdp_load_bytes),             \
>>>        FN(xdp_store_bytes),            \
>>>        FN(copy_from_user_task),        \
>>> +     FN(mkdir),                      \
>>> +     FN(rmdir),                      \
>>> +     FN(unlink),                     \
>>>        /* */
>>>
>>>    /* integer value in 'imm' field of BPF_CALL instruction selects which helper
>> [...]

  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-03 19:14 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-02-25 23:43 [PATCH bpf-next v1 0/9] Extend cgroup interface with bpf Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 1/9] bpf: Add mkdir, rmdir, unlink syscalls for prog_bpf_syscall Hao Luo
2022-02-27  5:18   ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-02-28 22:10     ` Hao Luo
2022-03-02 19:34       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 18:50         ` Hao Luo
2022-03-04 18:37           ` Hao Luo
2022-03-05 23:47             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-08 21:08               ` Hao Luo
2022-03-02 20:55   ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-03 18:56     ` Hao Luo
2022-03-03 19:13       ` Yonghong Song [this message]
2022-03-03 19:15         ` Hao Luo
2022-03-12  3:46   ` Al Viro
2022-03-14 17:07     ` Hao Luo
2022-03-14 23:10       ` Al Viro
2022-03-15 17:27         ` Hao Luo
2022-03-15 18:59           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-15 19:03             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-15 19:00           ` Al Viro
2022-03-15 19:47             ` Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 2/9] bpf: Add BPF_OBJ_PIN and BPF_OBJ_GET in the bpf_sys_bpf helper Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 3/9] selftests/bpf: tests mkdir, rmdir, unlink and pin in syscall Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 4/9] bpf: Introduce sleepable tracepoints Hao Luo
2022-03-02 19:41   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 19:37     ` Hao Luo
2022-03-03 19:59       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-02 21:23   ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-02 21:30     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03  1:08       ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-03  2:29         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 19:43           ` Hao Luo
2022-03-03 20:02             ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 20:04               ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 22:06                 ` Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 5/9] cgroup: Sleepable cgroup tracepoints Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 6/9] libbpf: Add sleepable tp_btf Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 7/9] bpf: Lift permission check in __sys_bpf when called from kernel Hao Luo
2022-03-02 20:01   ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03 19:14     ` Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 8/9] bpf: Introduce cgroup iter Hao Luo
2022-02-26  2:32   ` kernel test robot
2022-02-26  2:32   ` kernel test robot
2022-02-26  2:53   ` kernel test robot
2022-03-02 21:59   ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-03 20:02     ` Hao Luo
2022-03-02 22:45   ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-03  2:03     ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-03  3:03       ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-03  4:00         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-03-03  7:33         ` Yonghong Song
2022-03-03  8:13           ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2022-03-03 21:52           ` Hao Luo
2022-02-25 23:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v1 9/9] selftests/bpf: Tests using sleepable tracepoints to monitor cgroup events Hao Luo

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=2c5669f1-b9d9-ee78-c5ee-d29a41d4d70a@fb.com \
    --to=yhs@fb.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=jevburton.kernel@gmail.com \
    --cc=joshdon@google.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=shakeelb@google.com \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=tj@kernel.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 NNTP newsgroup(s).