From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>
To: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Cc: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Florent Revest <revest@chromium.org>,
Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@chromium.org>,
James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>,
"Serge E . Hallyn" <serge@hallyn.com>,
Khadija Kamran <kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com>,
Casey Schaufler <casey@schaufler-ca.com>,
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>,
John Johansen <john.johansen@canonical.com>,
Lukas Bulwahn <lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com>,
Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>,
Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] Fix kernel panic caused by bpf lsm return value
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2024 15:37:59 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2189be97-1bc6-4777-9ecd-41bec17f769a@huaweicloud.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHC9VhRKV1ATqkCdFQeSQpDc4znuZhBf_=GWuJ=zB=n4_1yYxg@mail.gmail.com>
On 3/19/2024 12:58 AM, Paul Moore wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 18, 2024 at 12:52 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> wrote:
>> On 03/16, Xu Kuohai wrote:
>>> From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> A bpf prog returning positive number attached to file_alloc_security hook
>>> will make kernel panic.
>>
>> I'll leave it up to KP. I remember there was a similar patch series in
>> the past, but I have no state on why it was not accepted..
>
> I believe this is the patchset you are referring to:
>
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-security-module/20240207124918.3498756-1-kpsingh@kernel.org
>
Thank you for the reply. IIUC, the above patchset is intended to reduce
the indirect call overhead of bpf lsm. I have tested it, and the panic
issue still exists with this patchset applied.
> It wasn't that the patchset was accepted or rejected, it is still in
> the review queue as there are higher priority items being kicked
> around in the LSM space at the moment. It also wasn't a pure bug-fix
> or feature patchset/patch, which muddied things a bit.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-19 7:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-16 12:23 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] Fix kernel panic caused by bpf lsm return value Xu Kuohai
2024-03-16 12:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] bpf, lsm: Annotate lsm hook return integer with new macro LSM_RET_INT Xu Kuohai
2024-03-16 12:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf, lsm: Add return value range description for lsm hook Xu Kuohai
2024-03-16 12:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] bpf, lsm: Add function to read lsm hook return value range Xu Kuohai
2024-03-16 12:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf, lsm: Check bpf lsm hook return values in verifier Xu Kuohai
2024-03-16 12:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] bpf: Fix compare error in function retval_range_within Xu Kuohai
2024-03-18 16:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] Fix kernel panic caused by bpf lsm return value Stanislav Fomichev
2024-03-18 16:58 ` Paul Moore
2024-03-19 7:37 ` Xu Kuohai [this message]
2024-03-18 17:02 ` Roberto Sassu
2024-03-19 7:54 ` Xu Kuohai
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=2189be97-1bc6-4777-9ecd-41bec17f769a@huaweicloud.com \
--to=xukuohai@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=casey@schaufler-ca.com \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=jackmanb@chromium.org \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=john.johansen@canonical.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kamrankhadijadj@gmail.com \
--cc=keescook@chromium.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lukas.bulwahn@gmail.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=revest@chromium.org \
--cc=roberto.sassu@huawei.com \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.