* [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets.
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/6] bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (5 more replies)
0 siblings, 6 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
Happy new year!
Last year the commit afd20b9290e1 ("af_unix: Replace the big lock with
small locks.") landed on bpf-next. Now we can use a batching algorithm
for bpf unix iter as bpf tcp iter.
Note that the first patch only can be a candidate for the bpf tree.
Kuniyuki Iwashima (6):
bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt().
bpf: Add SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF in _bpf_getsockopt().
bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter.
bpf: Support bpf_(get|set)sockopt() in bpf unix iter.
selftest/bpf: Test batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt in bpf unix iter.
selftest/bpf: Fix a stale comment.
net/core/filter.c | 8 +
net/unix/af_unix.c | 197 +++++++++++++++++-
.../bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c | 100 +++++++++
.../bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c | 60 ++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c | 2 +-
.../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h | 2 +
6 files changed, 361 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 1/6] bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt().
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] bpf: Add SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF in _bpf_getsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (4 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev, Guillaume Nault
The commit 4057765f2dee ("sock: consistent handling of extreme
SO_SNDBUF/SO_RCVBUF values") added a change to prevent underflow
in setsockopt() around SO_SNDBUF/SO_RCVBUF.
This patch adds the same change to _bpf_setsockopt().
Fixes: 4057765f2dee ("sock: consistent handling of extreme SO_SNDBUF/SO_RCVBUF values")
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
CC: Guillaume Nault <gnault@redhat.com>
---
net/core/filter.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index 606ab5a98a1a..368fe28c8dc6 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -4741,12 +4741,14 @@ static int _bpf_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int optname,
switch (optname) {
case SO_RCVBUF:
val = min_t(u32, val, sysctl_rmem_max);
+ val = min_t(int, val, INT_MAX / 2);
sk->sk_userlocks |= SOCK_RCVBUF_LOCK;
WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_rcvbuf,
max_t(int, val * 2, SOCK_MIN_RCVBUF));
break;
case SO_SNDBUF:
val = min_t(u32, val, sysctl_wmem_max);
+ val = min_t(int, val, INT_MAX / 2);
sk->sk_userlocks |= SOCK_SNDBUF_LOCK;
WRITE_ONCE(sk->sk_sndbuf,
max_t(int, val * 2, SOCK_MIN_SNDBUF));
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] bpf: Add SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF in _bpf_getsockopt().
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/6] bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (3 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
This patch exposes SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF through bpf_getsockopt().
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
---
net/core/filter.c | 6 ++++++
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index 368fe28c8dc6..cac2be559ab0 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -4969,6 +4969,12 @@ static int _bpf_getsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int optname,
goto err_clear;
switch (optname) {
+ case SO_RCVBUF:
+ *((int *)optval) = sk->sk_rcvbuf;
+ break;
+ case SO_SNDBUF:
+ *((int *)optval) = sk->sk_sndbuf;
+ break;
case SO_MARK:
*((int *)optval) = sk->sk_mark;
break;
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter.
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/6] bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] bpf: Add SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF in _bpf_getsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-05 22:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/6] bpf: Support bpf_(get|set)sockopt() " Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (2 subsequent siblings)
5 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
The commit 04c7820b776f ("bpf: tcp: Bpf iter batching and lock_sock")
introduces the batching algorithm to iterate TCP sockets with more
consistency.
This patch uses the same algorithm to iterate AF_UNIX sockets.
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
---
net/unix/af_unix.c | 182 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 175 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
index c19569819866..dd6804086372 100644
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@ -3347,6 +3347,14 @@ static const struct seq_operations unix_seq_ops = {
};
#if IS_BUILTIN(CONFIG_UNIX) && defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)
+struct bpf_unix_iter_state {
+ struct seq_net_private p;
+ unsigned int cur_sk;
+ unsigned int end_sk;
+ unsigned int max_sk;
+ struct sock **batch;
+};
+
struct bpf_iter__unix {
__bpf_md_ptr(struct bpf_iter_meta *, meta);
__bpf_md_ptr(struct unix_sock *, unix_sk);
@@ -3365,24 +3373,155 @@ static int unix_prog_seq_show(struct bpf_prog *prog, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta,
return bpf_iter_run_prog(prog, &ctx);
}
+static int bpf_iter_unix_hold_batch(struct seq_file *seq, struct sock *start_sk)
+
+{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = seq->private;
+ unsigned int expected = 1;
+ struct sock *sk;
+
+ sock_hold(start_sk);
+ iter->batch[iter->end_sk++] = start_sk;
+
+ for (sk = sk_next(start_sk); sk; sk = sk_next(sk)) {
+ if (sock_net(sk) != seq_file_net(seq))
+ continue;
+
+ if (iter->end_sk < iter->max_sk) {
+ sock_hold(sk);
+ iter->batch[iter->end_sk++] = sk;
+ }
+
+ expected++;
+ }
+
+ spin_unlock(&unix_table_locks[start_sk->sk_hash]);
+
+ return expected;
+}
+
+static void bpf_iter_unix_put_batch(struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter)
+{
+ while (iter->cur_sk < iter->end_sk)
+ sock_put(iter->batch[iter->cur_sk++]);
+}
+
+static int bpf_iter_unix_realloc_batch(struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter,
+ unsigned int new_batch_sz)
+{
+ struct sock **new_batch;
+
+ new_batch = kvmalloc(sizeof(*new_batch) * new_batch_sz,
+ GFP_USER | __GFP_NOWARN);
+ if (!new_batch)
+ return -ENOMEM;
+
+ bpf_iter_unix_put_batch(iter);
+ kvfree(iter->batch);
+ iter->batch = new_batch;
+ iter->max_sk = new_batch_sz;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static struct sock *bpf_iter_unix_batch(struct seq_file *seq,
+ struct sock *start_sk,
+ loff_t *pos)
+{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = seq->private;
+ unsigned int expected;
+ bool resized = false;
+ struct sock *sk;
+
+again:
+ /* Get a new batch */
+ iter->cur_sk = 0;
+ iter->end_sk = 0;
+
+ sk = unix_next_socket(seq, start_sk, pos);
+ if (!sk)
+ return NULL; /* Done */
+
+ expected = bpf_iter_unix_hold_batch(seq, sk);
+
+ if (iter->end_sk == expected)
+ return sk;
+
+ if (!resized && !bpf_iter_unix_realloc_batch(iter, expected * 3 / 2)) {
+ resized = true;
+ goto again;
+ }
+
+ return sk;
+}
+
+static void *bpf_iter_unix_seq_start(struct seq_file *seq, loff_t *pos)
+{
+ if (!*pos)
+ return SEQ_START_TOKEN;
+
+ if (get_bucket(*pos) >= ARRAY_SIZE(unix_socket_table))
+ return NULL;
+
+ /* bpf iter does not support lseek, so it always
+ * continue from where it was stop()-ped.
+ */
+ return bpf_iter_unix_batch(seq, NULL, pos);
+}
+
+static void *bpf_iter_unix_seq_next(struct seq_file *seq, void *v, loff_t *pos)
+{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = seq->private;
+ struct sock *sk;
+
+ /* Whenever seq_next() is called, the iter->cur_sk is
+ * done with seq_show(), so advance to the next sk in
+ * the batch.
+ */
+ if (iter->cur_sk < iter->end_sk)
+ sock_put(iter->batch[iter->cur_sk++]);
+
+ ++*pos;
+
+ if (iter->cur_sk < iter->end_sk)
+ sk = iter->batch[iter->cur_sk];
+ else
+ sk = bpf_iter_unix_batch(seq, v, pos);
+
+ return sk;
+}
+
static int bpf_iter_unix_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
{
struct bpf_iter_meta meta;
struct bpf_prog *prog;
struct sock *sk = v;
uid_t uid;
+ bool slow;
+ int ret;
if (v == SEQ_START_TOKEN)
return 0;
+ slow = lock_sock_fast(sk);
+
+ if (unlikely(sk_unhashed(sk))) {
+ ret = SEQ_SKIP;
+ goto unlock;
+ }
+
uid = from_kuid_munged(seq_user_ns(seq), sock_i_uid(sk));
meta.seq = seq;
prog = bpf_iter_get_info(&meta, false);
- return unix_prog_seq_show(prog, &meta, v, uid);
+ ret = unix_prog_seq_show(prog, &meta, v, uid);
+unlock:
+ unlock_sock_fast(sk, slow);
+ return ret;
}
static void bpf_iter_unix_seq_stop(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = seq->private;
struct bpf_iter_meta meta;
struct bpf_prog *prog;
@@ -3393,12 +3532,13 @@ static void bpf_iter_unix_seq_stop(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
(void)unix_prog_seq_show(prog, &meta, v, 0);
}
- unix_seq_stop(seq, v);
+ if (iter->cur_sk < iter->end_sk)
+ bpf_iter_unix_put_batch(iter);
}
static const struct seq_operations bpf_iter_unix_seq_ops = {
- .start = unix_seq_start,
- .next = unix_seq_next,
+ .start = bpf_iter_unix_seq_start,
+ .next = bpf_iter_unix_seq_next,
.stop = bpf_iter_unix_seq_stop,
.show = bpf_iter_unix_seq_show,
};
@@ -3447,11 +3587,39 @@ static struct pernet_operations unix_net_ops = {
DEFINE_BPF_ITER_FUNC(unix, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta,
struct unix_sock *unix_sk, uid_t uid)
+#define INIT_BATCH_SZ 16
+
+static int bpf_iter_init_unix(void *priv_data, struct bpf_iter_aux_info *aux)
+{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = priv_data;
+ int err;
+
+ err = bpf_iter_init_seq_net(priv_data, aux);
+ if (err)
+ return err;
+
+ err = bpf_iter_unix_realloc_batch(iter, INIT_BATCH_SZ);
+ if (err) {
+ bpf_iter_fini_seq_net(priv_data);
+ return err;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+static void bpf_iter_fini_unix(void *priv_data)
+{
+ struct bpf_unix_iter_state *iter = priv_data;
+
+ bpf_iter_fini_seq_net(priv_data);
+ kvfree(iter->batch);
+}
+
static const struct bpf_iter_seq_info unix_seq_info = {
.seq_ops = &bpf_iter_unix_seq_ops,
- .init_seq_private = bpf_iter_init_seq_net,
- .fini_seq_private = bpf_iter_fini_seq_net,
- .seq_priv_size = sizeof(struct seq_net_private),
+ .init_seq_private = bpf_iter_init_unix,
+ .fini_seq_private = bpf_iter_fini_unix,
+ .seq_priv_size = sizeof(struct bpf_unix_iter_state),
};
static struct bpf_iter_reg unix_reg_info = {
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 4/6] bpf: Support bpf_(get|set)sockopt() in bpf unix iter.
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] selftest/bpf: Test batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt " Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/6] selftest/bpf: Fix a stale comment Kuniyuki Iwashima
5 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
This patch makes bpf_(get|set)sockopt() available when iterating AF_UNIX
sockets.
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
---
net/unix/af_unix.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
diff --git a/net/unix/af_unix.c b/net/unix/af_unix.c
index dd6804086372..06c997fd6830 100644
--- a/net/unix/af_unix.c
+++ b/net/unix/af_unix.c
@@ -3622,6 +3622,20 @@ static const struct bpf_iter_seq_info unix_seq_info = {
.seq_priv_size = sizeof(struct bpf_unix_iter_state),
};
+static const struct bpf_func_proto *
+bpf_iter_unix_get_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id,
+ const struct bpf_prog *prog)
+{
+ switch (func_id) {
+ case BPF_FUNC_setsockopt:
+ return &bpf_sk_setsockopt_proto;
+ case BPF_FUNC_getsockopt:
+ return &bpf_sk_getsockopt_proto;
+ default:
+ return NULL;
+ }
+}
+
static struct bpf_iter_reg unix_reg_info = {
.target = "unix",
.ctx_arg_info_size = 1,
@@ -3629,6 +3643,7 @@ static struct bpf_iter_reg unix_reg_info = {
{ offsetof(struct bpf_iter__unix, unix_sk),
PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL },
},
+ .get_func_proto = bpf_iter_unix_get_func_proto,
.seq_info = &unix_seq_info,
};
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] selftest/bpf: Test batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt in bpf unix iter.
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (3 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/6] bpf: Support bpf_(get|set)sockopt() " Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/6] selftest/bpf: Fix a stale comment Kuniyuki Iwashima
5 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
This patch adds a test for the batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt in bpf
unix iter.
It does the following.
1. Creates an abstract UNIX domain socket
2. Call bpf_setsockopt()
3. Call bpf_getsockopt() and save the value
4. Call setsockopt()
5. Call getsockopt() and save the value
6. Compare the saved values
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
.../bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c | 60 +++++++++++
.../selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h | 2 +
3 files changed, 162 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..ee725d4d98a5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright Amazon.com Inc. or its affiliates. */
+#include <sys/socket.h>
+#include <sys/un.h>
+#include <test_progs.h>
+#include "bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.skel.h"
+
+#define NR_CASES 5
+
+static int create_unix_socket(struct bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix *skel)
+{
+ struct sockaddr_un addr = {
+ .sun_family = AF_UNIX,
+ .sun_path = "",
+ };
+ socklen_t len;
+ int fd, err;
+
+ fd = socket(AF_UNIX, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
+ if (!ASSERT_NEQ(fd, -1, "socket"))
+ return -1;
+
+ len = offsetof(struct sockaddr_un, sun_path);
+ err = bind(fd, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bind"))
+ return -1;
+
+ len = sizeof(addr);
+ err = getsockname(fd, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "getsockname"))
+ return -1;
+
+ memcpy(&skel->bss->sun_path, &addr.sun_path,
+ len - offsetof(struct sockaddr_un, sun_path));
+
+ return fd;
+}
+
+static void test_sndbuf(struct bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix *skel, int fd)
+{
+ socklen_t optlen;
+ int i, err;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_CASES; i++) {
+ if (!ASSERT_NEQ(skel->data->sndbuf_getsockopt[i], -1,
+ "bpf_(get|set)sockopt"))
+ return;
+
+ err = setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF,
+ &(skel->data->sndbuf_setsockopt[i]),
+ sizeof(skel->data->sndbuf_setsockopt[i]));
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt"))
+ return;
+
+ optlen = sizeof(skel->bss->sndbuf_getsockopt_expected[i]);
+ err = getsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF,
+ &(skel->bss->sndbuf_getsockopt_expected[i]),
+ &optlen);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "getsockopt"))
+ return;
+
+ if (!ASSERT_EQ(skel->data->sndbuf_getsockopt[i],
+ skel->bss->sndbuf_getsockopt_expected[i],
+ "bpf_(get|set)sockopt"))
+ return;
+ }
+}
+
+void test_bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix(void)
+{
+ struct bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix *skel;
+ int err, unix_fd, iter_fd;
+ char buf;
+
+ skel = bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "open_and_load"))
+ return;
+
+ unix_fd = create_unix_socket(skel);
+ if (!ASSERT_NEQ(unix_fd, -1, "create_unix_server"))
+ goto destroy;
+
+ skel->links.change_sndbuf = bpf_program__attach_iter(skel->progs.change_sndbuf, NULL);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel->links.change_sndbuf, "bpf_program__attach_iter"))
+ goto destroy;
+
+ iter_fd = bpf_iter_create(bpf_link__fd(skel->links.change_sndbuf));
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(iter_fd, 0, "bpf_iter_create"))
+ goto destroy;
+
+ while ((err = read(iter_fd, &buf, sizeof(buf))) == -1 &&
+ errno == EAGAIN)
+ ;
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "read iter error"))
+ goto destroy;
+
+ test_sndbuf(skel, unix_fd);
+destroy:
+ bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix__destroy(skel);
+}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..eafc877ea460
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix.c
@@ -0,0 +1,60 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright Amazon.com Inc. or its affiliates. */
+#include "bpf_iter.h"
+#include "bpf_tracing_net.h"
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+#include <limits.h>
+
+#define AUTOBIND_LEN 6
+char sun_path[AUTOBIND_LEN];
+
+#define NR_CASES 5
+int sndbuf_setsockopt[NR_CASES] = {-1, 0, 8192, INT_MAX / 2, INT_MAX};
+int sndbuf_getsockopt[NR_CASES] = {-1, -1, -1, -1, -1};
+int sndbuf_getsockopt_expected[NR_CASES];
+
+static inline int cmpname(struct unix_sock *unix_sk)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < AUTOBIND_LEN; i++) {
+ if (unix_sk->addr->name->sun_path[i] != sun_path[i])
+ return -1;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("iter/unix")
+int change_sndbuf(struct bpf_iter__unix *ctx)
+{
+ struct unix_sock *unix_sk = ctx->unix_sk;
+ int i, err;
+
+ if (!unix_sk || !unix_sk->addr)
+ return 0;
+
+ if (unix_sk->addr->name->sun_path[0])
+ return 0;
+
+ if (cmpname(unix_sk))
+ return 0;
+
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_CASES; i++) {
+ err = bpf_setsockopt(unix_sk, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF,
+ &sndbuf_setsockopt[i],
+ sizeof(sndbuf_setsockopt[i]));
+ if (err)
+ break;
+
+ err = bpf_getsockopt(unix_sk, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF,
+ &sndbuf_getsockopt[i],
+ sizeof(sndbuf_getsockopt[i]));
+ if (err)
+ break;
+ }
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h
index e0f42601be9b..1c1289ba5fc5 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_tracing_net.h
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
#define AF_INET 2
#define AF_INET6 10
+#define SOL_SOCKET 1
+#define SO_SNDBUF 7
#define __SO_ACCEPTCON (1 << 16)
#define SOL_TCP 6
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH bpf-next 6/6] selftest/bpf: Fix a stale comment.
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
` (4 preceding siblings ...)
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] selftest/bpf: Test batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt " Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-04 1:31 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
5 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-04 1:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima,
Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf, netdev
The commit b8a58aa6fccc ("af_unix: Cut unix_validate_addr() out of
unix_mkname().") moved the bound test part into unix_validate_addr().
Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c
index c21e3f545371..e6aefae38894 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/bpf_iter_unix.c
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ int dump_unix(struct bpf_iter__unix *ctx)
BPF_SEQ_PRINTF(seq, " @");
for (i = 1; i < len; i++) {
- /* unix_mkname() tests this upper bound. */
+ /* unix_validate_addr() tests this upper bound. */
if (i >= sizeof(struct sockaddr_un))
break;
--
2.30.2
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter.
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter Kuniyuki Iwashima
@ 2022-01-05 22:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-05 23:06 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-01-05 22:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
Martin KaFai Lau, Benjamin Herrenschmidt, Kuniyuki Iwashima, bpf,
Network Development
On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 5:33 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp> wrote:
>
> The commit 04c7820b776f ("bpf: tcp: Bpf iter batching and lock_sock")
> introduces the batching algorithm to iterate TCP sockets with more
> consistency.
>
> This patch uses the same algorithm to iterate AF_UNIX sockets.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
There is something wrong in this patch:
./test_progs -t bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix
[ 14.993474] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
[ 15.068986]
[ 15.069203] =====================================
[ 15.069698] WARNING: bad unlock balance detected!
[ 15.070187] 5.16.0-rc7-01992-g15d8ab86952d #3780 Tainted: G O
[ 15.070937] -------------------------------------
[ 15.071441] test_progs/1438 is trying to release lock
(&unix_table_locks[i]) at:
[ 15.072209] [<ffffffff831b7ae9>] unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
[ 15.072825] but there are no more locks to release!
[ 15.073329]
[ 15.073329] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 15.074004] 1 lock held by test_progs/1438:
[ 15.074441] #0: ffff8881072c81c8 (&p->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
bpf_seq_read+0x61/0xfa0
[ 15.075279]
[ 15.075279] stack backtrace:
[ 15.075744] CPU: 0 PID: 1438 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G
O 5.16.0-rc7-01992-g15d8ab86952d #3780
[ 15.076792] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),
BIOS rel-1.12.0-59-gc9ba5276e321-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
[ 15.077986] Call Trace:
[ 15.078250] <TASK>
[ 15.078476] dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
[ 15.078873] lock_release+0x48e/0x650
[ 15.079262] ? unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
[ 15.079712] ? lock_downgrade+0x690/0x690
[ 15.080131] ? lock_downgrade+0x690/0x690
[ 15.080559] _raw_spin_unlock+0x17/0x40
[ 15.080979] unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
[ 15.081402] ? bpf_iter_unix_seq_show+0x20b/0x270
[ 15.081898] bpf_iter_unix_batch+0xf7/0x580
[ 15.082337] ? trace_kmalloc_node+0x29/0xd0
[ 15.082786] bpf_seq_read+0x4a1/0xfa0
[ 15.083176] ? up_read+0x1a1/0x720
[ 15.083538] vfs_read+0x128/0x4e0
[ 15.083902] ksys_read+0xe7/0x1b0
[ 15.084253] ? vfs_write+0x8b0/0x8b0
[ 15.084638] do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
[ 15.085016] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
[ 15.085545] RIP: 0033:0x7f2c4a5ad8b2
[ 15.085931] Code: 97 20 00 f7 d8 64 89 02 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff eb
b6 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 8b 05 96 db 20 00 85 c0 75 12 31
c0 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 56 c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 41 54 49 89 d4 55
48 89
[ 15.087875] RSP: 002b:00007fff4c8c24b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX:
0000000000000000
[ 15.088658] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007f2c4a5ad8b2
[ 15.089396] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 00007fff4c8c24cb RDI: 000000000000000a
[ 15.090132] RBP: 00007fff4c8c2550 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007fff4c8c2397
[ 15.090870] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 000000000040d910
[ 15.091618] R13: 00007fff4c8c2750 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
[ 15.092403] </TASK>
I've applied patches 1 and 2 to bpf-next.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter.
2022-01-05 22:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
@ 2022-01-05 23:06 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima @ 2022-01-05 23:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: alexei.starovoitov
Cc: andrii, ast, benh, bpf, daniel, kafai, kuni1840, kuniyu, netdev
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 14:22:38 -0800
> On Mon, Jan 3, 2022 at 5:33 PM Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp> wrote:
> >
> > The commit 04c7820b776f ("bpf: tcp: Bpf iter batching and lock_sock")
> > introduces the batching algorithm to iterate TCP sockets with more
> > consistency.
> >
> > This patch uses the same algorithm to iterate AF_UNIX sockets.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@amazon.co.jp>
>
> There is something wrong in this patch:
>
> ./test_progs -t bpf_iter_setsockopt_unix
> [ 14.993474] bpf_testmod: loading out-of-tree module taints kernel.
> [ 15.068986]
> [ 15.069203] =====================================
> [ 15.069698] WARNING: bad unlock balance detected!
> [ 15.070187] 5.16.0-rc7-01992-g15d8ab86952d #3780 Tainted: G O
> [ 15.070937] -------------------------------------
> [ 15.071441] test_progs/1438 is trying to release lock
> (&unix_table_locks[i]) at:
> [ 15.072209] [<ffffffff831b7ae9>] unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
> [ 15.072825] but there are no more locks to release!
> [ 15.073329]
> [ 15.073329] other info that might help us debug this:
> [ 15.074004] 1 lock held by test_progs/1438:
> [ 15.074441] #0: ffff8881072c81c8 (&p->lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at:
> bpf_seq_read+0x61/0xfa0
> [ 15.075279]
> [ 15.075279] stack backtrace:
> [ 15.075744] CPU: 0 PID: 1438 Comm: test_progs Tainted: G
> O 5.16.0-rc7-01992-g15d8ab86952d #3780
> [ 15.076792] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996),
> BIOS rel-1.12.0-59-gc9ba5276e321-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014
> [ 15.077986] Call Trace:
> [ 15.078250] <TASK>
> [ 15.078476] dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x57
> [ 15.078873] lock_release+0x48e/0x650
> [ 15.079262] ? unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
> [ 15.079712] ? lock_downgrade+0x690/0x690
> [ 15.080131] ? lock_downgrade+0x690/0x690
> [ 15.080559] _raw_spin_unlock+0x17/0x40
> [ 15.080979] unix_next_socket+0x169/0x460
> [ 15.081402] ? bpf_iter_unix_seq_show+0x20b/0x270
> [ 15.081898] bpf_iter_unix_batch+0xf7/0x580
> [ 15.082337] ? trace_kmalloc_node+0x29/0xd0
> [ 15.082786] bpf_seq_read+0x4a1/0xfa0
> [ 15.083176] ? up_read+0x1a1/0x720
> [ 15.083538] vfs_read+0x128/0x4e0
> [ 15.083902] ksys_read+0xe7/0x1b0
> [ 15.084253] ? vfs_write+0x8b0/0x8b0
> [ 15.084638] do_syscall_64+0x34/0x80
> [ 15.085016] entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x44/0xae
> [ 15.085545] RIP: 0033:0x7f2c4a5ad8b2
> [ 15.085931] Code: 97 20 00 f7 d8 64 89 02 48 c7 c0 ff ff ff ff eb
> b6 0f 1f 80 00 00 00 00 f3 0f 1e fa 8b 05 96 db 20 00 85 c0 75 12 31
> c0 0f 05 <48> 3d 00 f0 ff ff 77 56 c3 0f 1f 44 00 00 41 54 49 89 d4 55
> 48 89
> [ 15.087875] RSP: 002b:00007fff4c8c24b8 EFLAGS: 00000246 ORIG_RAX:
> 0000000000000000
> [ 15.088658] RAX: ffffffffffffffda RBX: 0000000000000000 RCX: 00007f2c4a5ad8b2
> [ 15.089396] RDX: 0000000000000001 RSI: 00007fff4c8c24cb RDI: 000000000000000a
> [ 15.090132] RBP: 00007fff4c8c2550 R08: 0000000000000000 R09: 00007fff4c8c2397
> [ 15.090870] R10: 0000000000000000 R11: 0000000000000246 R12: 000000000040d910
> [ 15.091618] R13: 00007fff4c8c2750 R14: 0000000000000000 R15: 0000000000000000
> [ 15.092403] </TASK>
>
>
> I've applied patches 1 and 2 to bpf-next.
Thanks, I will take a look with lockdep enabled.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2022-01-05 23:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-01-04 1:31 [PATCH bpf-next 0/6] bpf: Batching iter for AF_UNIX sockets Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/6] bpf: Fix SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF handling in _bpf_setsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/6] bpf: Add SO_RCVBUF/SO_SNDBUF in _bpf_getsockopt() Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: af_unix: Use batching algorithm in bpf unix iter Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-05 22:22 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-01-05 23:06 ` Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/6] bpf: Support bpf_(get|set)sockopt() " Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] selftest/bpf: Test batching and bpf_(get|set)sockopt " Kuniyuki Iwashima
2022-01-04 1:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/6] selftest/bpf: Fix a stale comment Kuniyuki Iwashima
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).