From: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@fb.com>,
Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: Allow using bpf_sk_storage in FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW_TP
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 23:01:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACYkzJ4Jdabs5ot7TnHmeq2x+ULhuPuw8wwbR2gQzi22c3N_7A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5fa9a741dc362_8c0e20827@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch>
On Mon, Nov 9, 2020 at 9:32 PM John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 5:52 PM Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Nov 06, 2020 at 05:14:14PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2020 at 2:08 PM Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch enables the FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW_TP tracing program to use
> > > > > the bpf_sk_storage_(get|delete) helper, so those tracing programs
> > > > > can access the sk's bpf_local_storage and the later selftest
> > > > > will show some examples.
> > > > >
> > > > > The bpf_sk_storage is currently used in bpf-tcp-cc, tc,
> > > > > cg sockops...etc which is running either in softirq or
> > > > > task context.
> > > > >
> > > > > This patch adds bpf_sk_storage_get_tracing_proto and
> > > > > bpf_sk_storage_delete_tracing_proto. They will check
> > > > > in runtime that the helpers can only be called when serving
> > > > > softirq or running in a task context. That should enable
> > > > > most common tracing use cases on sk.
> > > > >
> > > > > During the load time, the new tracing_allowed() function
> > > > > will ensure the tracing prog using the bpf_sk_storage_(get|delete)
> > > > > helper is not tracing any *sk_storage*() function itself.
> > > > > The sk is passed as "void *" when calling into bpf_local_storage.
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
> > > > > ---
> > > > > include/net/bpf_sk_storage.h | 2 +
> > > > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 5 +++
> > > > > net/core/bpf_sk_storage.c | 73 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > 3 files changed, 80 insertions(+)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [...]
> > > >
> > > > > + switch (prog->expected_attach_type) {
> > > > > + case BPF_TRACE_RAW_TP:
> > > > > + /* bpf_sk_storage has no trace point */
> > > > > + return true;
> > > > > + case BPF_TRACE_FENTRY:
> > > > > + case BPF_TRACE_FEXIT:
> > > > > + btf_vmlinux = bpf_get_btf_vmlinux();
> > > > > + btf_id = prog->aux->attach_btf_id;
> > > > > + t = btf_type_by_id(btf_vmlinux, btf_id);
> > > > > + tname = btf_name_by_offset(btf_vmlinux, t->name_off);
> > > > > + return !strstr(tname, "sk_storage");
> > > >
> > > > I'm always feeling uneasy about substring checks... Also, KP just
> > > > fixed the issue with string-based checks for LSM. Can we use a
> > > > BTF_ID_SET of blacklisted functions instead?
> > > KP one is different. It accidentally whitelist-ed more than it should.
> > >
> > > It is a blacklist here. It is actually cleaner and safer to blacklist
> > > all functions with "sk_storage" and too pessimistic is fine here.
> >
> > Fine for whom? Prefix check would be half-bad, but substring check is
> > horrible. Suddenly "task_storage" (and anything related) would be also
> > blacklisted. Let's do a prefix check at least.
> >
>
> Agree, prefix check sounds like a good idea. But, just doing a quick
> grep seems like it will need at least bpf_sk_storage and sk_storage to
> catch everything.
Is there any reason we are not using BTF ID sets and an allow list similar
to bpf_d_path helper? (apart from the obvious inconvenience of
needing to update the set in the kernel)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-10 22:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-06 22:07 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] bpf: Enable bpf_sk_storage for FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW_TP Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-06 22:07 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Folding omem_charge() into sk_storage_charge() Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-06 22:44 ` Song Liu
2020-11-06 22:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] bpf: Allow using bpf_sk_storage in FENTRY/FEXIT/RAW_TP Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-06 22:59 ` Song Liu
2020-11-06 23:18 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-07 0:20 ` Song Liu
2020-11-07 1:14 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-11-07 1:52 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-09 18:09 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-11-09 20:32 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-10 22:01 ` KP Singh [this message]
2020-11-10 23:43 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-10 23:53 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-11-11 0:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-11 0:17 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-11-11 0:20 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-11-06 22:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] bpf: selftest: Use " Martin KaFai Lau
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=CACYkzJ4Jdabs5ot7TnHmeq2x+ULhuPuw8wwbR2gQzi22c3N_7A@mail.gmail.com \
--to=kpsingh@chromium.org \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.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).