bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/3] bpf, netns: Keep attached programs in bpf_prog_array
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2020 19:18:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87o8p8mlfx.fsf@cloudflare.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200623103459.697774-3-jakub@cloudflare.com>

On Tue, Jun 23, 2020 at 12:34 PM CEST, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> Prepare for having multi-prog attachments for new netns attach types by
> storing programs to run in a bpf_prog_array, which is well suited for
> iterating over programs and running them in sequence.
>
> Because bpf_prog_array is dynamically resized, after this change a
> potentially blocking memory allocation in bpf(PROG_QUERY) callback can
> happen, in order to collect program IDs before copying the values to
> user-space supplied buffer. This forces us to adapt how we protect access
> to the attached program in the callback. As bpf_prog_array_copy_to_user()
> helper can sleep, we switch from an RCU read lock to holding a mutex that
> serializes updaters.
>
> To handle bpf(PROG_ATTACH) scenario when we are replacing an already
> attached program, we introduce a new bpf_prog_array helper called
> bpf_prog_array_replace_item that will exchange the old program with a new
> one. bpf-cgroup does away with such helper by computing an index into the
> array from a program position in an external list of attached
> programs/links. Such approach fails when a dummy prog is left in the array
> after a memory allocation failure on link release, but is necessary in
> bpf-cgroup case because the same BPF program can be present in the array
> multiple times due to inheritance, and attachment cannot be reliably
> identified by bpf_prog pointer comparison.
>
> No functional changes intended.
>
> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/bpf.h        |   3 +
>  include/net/netns/bpf.h    |   5 +-
>  kernel/bpf/core.c          |  20 ++++--
>  kernel/bpf/net_namespace.c | 137 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
>  net/core/flow_dissector.c  |  21 +++---
>  5 files changed, 132 insertions(+), 54 deletions(-)
>

[...]

> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/net_namespace.c b/kernel/bpf/net_namespace.c
> index b951dab2687f..593523a22168 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/net_namespace.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/net_namespace.c

[...]

> @@ -93,8 +108,16 @@ static int bpf_netns_link_update_prog(struct bpf_link *link,
>  		goto out_unlock;
>  	}
>
> +	run_array = rcu_dereference_protected(net->bpf.run_array[type],
> +					      lockdep_is_held(&netns_bpf_mutex));
> +	if (run_array)
> +		ret = bpf_prog_array_replace_item(run_array, link->prog, new_prog);

Thinking about this some more, link update should fail with -EINVAL if
new_prog already exists in run_array. Same as PROG_ATTACH fails with
-EINVAL when trying to attach the same prog for the second time.

Otherwise, LINK_UPDATE can lead to having same BPF prog present multiple
times in the prog_array, once attaching more than one prog gets enabled.

Then we would we end up with the same challenge as bpf-cgroup, that is
how to find the program index into the prog_array in presence of
dummy_prog's.

> +	else
> +		ret = -ENOENT;
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +
>  	old_prog = xchg(&link->prog, new_prog);
> -	rcu_assign_pointer(net->bpf.progs[type], new_prog);
>  	bpf_prog_put(old_prog);
>
>  out_unlock:

[...]

> @@ -217,14 +249,25 @@ int netns_bpf_prog_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *prog)
>  	if (ret)
>  		goto out_unlock;
>
> -	attached = rcu_dereference_protected(net->bpf.progs[type],
> -					     lockdep_is_held(&netns_bpf_mutex));
> +	attached = net->bpf.progs[type];
>  	if (attached == prog) {
>  		/* The same program cannot be attached twice */
>  		ret = -EINVAL;
>  		goto out_unlock;
>  	}
> -	rcu_assign_pointer(net->bpf.progs[type], prog);
> +
> +	run_array = rcu_dereference_protected(net->bpf.run_array[type],
> +					      lockdep_is_held(&netns_bpf_mutex));
> +	if (run_array) {
> +		ret = bpf_prog_array_replace_item(run_array, attached, prog);

I didn't consider here that there can be a run_array with a dummy_prog
from a link release that failed to allocate memory.

In such case bpf_prog_array_replace_item will fail, while we actually
want to replace the dummy_prog.

The right thing to do is to replace the first item in prog array:

	if (run_array) {
		WRITE_ONCE(run_array->items[0].prog, prog);
	} else {
                /* allocate a bpf_prog_array */
        }

This leaves just one user of bpf_prog_array_replace_item(), so I think
I'm just going to fold it into its only caller, that is the update_prog
callback.

> +	} else {
> +		ret = bpf_prog_array_copy(NULL, NULL, prog, &run_array);
> +		rcu_assign_pointer(net->bpf.run_array[type], run_array);
> +	}
> +	if (ret)
> +		goto out_unlock;
> +
> +	net->bpf.progs[type] = prog;
>  	if (attached)
>  		bpf_prog_put(attached);
>

[...]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-06-24 17:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-06-23 10:34 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/3] bpf, netns: Prepare for multi-prog attachment Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-23 10:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/3] flow_dissector: Pull BPF program assignment up to bpf-netns Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-23 10:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/3] bpf, netns: Keep attached programs in bpf_prog_array Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-23 19:33   ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-06-23 20:59     ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-23 21:24       ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-06-24 17:33         ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-24 17:18   ` Jakub Sitnicki [this message]
2020-06-24 17:47     ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-06-24 18:13       ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-24 18:24         ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-06-24 18:37           ` Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-23 10:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/3] bpf, netns: Keep a list of attached bpf_link's Jakub Sitnicki
2020-06-29 14:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/3] bpf, netns: Prepare for multi-prog attachment Daniel Borkmann
2020-06-29 14:57   ` Daniel Borkmann

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=87o8p8mlfx.fsf@cloudflare.com \
    --to=jakub@cloudflare.com \
    --cc=andriin@fb.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@cloudflare.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.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).