From: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 06/10] bpf: expose bpf_{g,s}etsockopt to lsm cgroup
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 22:42:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220617054249.iedbzuakyzg67o75@kafai-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220610165803.2860154-7-sdf@google.com>
On Fri, Jun 10, 2022 at 09:57:59AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> I don't see how to make it nice without introducing btf id lists
> for the hooks where these helpers are allowed. Some LSM hooks
> work on the locked sockets, some are triggering early and
> don't grab any locks, so have two lists for now:
>
> 1. LSM hooks which trigger under socket lock - minority of the hooks,
> but ideal case for us, we can expose existing BTF-based helpers
> 2. LSM hooks which trigger without socket lock, but they trigger
> early in the socket creation path where it should be safe to
> do setsockopt without any locks
> 3. The rest are prohibited. I'm thinking that this use-case might
> be a good gateway to sleeping lsm cgroup hooks in the future.
> We can either expose lock/unlock operations (and add tracking
> to the verifier) or have another set of bpf_setsockopt
> wrapper that grab the locks and might sleep.
Another possibility is to acquire/release the sk lock in
__bpf_prog_{enter,exit}_lsm_cgroup(). However, it will unnecessarily
acquire it even the prog is not doing any get/setsockopt.
It probably can make some checking to avoid the lock...etc. :/
sleepable bpf-prog is a cleaner way out. From a quick look,
cgroup_storage is not safe for sleepable bpf-prog.
All other BPF_MAP_TYPE_{SK,INODE,TASK}_STORAGE is already
safe once their common infra in bpf_local_storage.c was made
sleepable-safe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> ---
> include/linux/bpf.h | 2 ++
> kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> net/core/filter.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------
> 3 files changed, 95 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index 503f28fa66d2..c0a269269882 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -2282,6 +2282,8 @@ extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_for_each_map_elem_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_btf_find_by_name_kind_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sk_setsockopt_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_sk_getsockopt_proto;
> +extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_unlocked_sk_setsockopt_proto;
> +extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_unlocked_sk_getsockopt_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_kallsyms_lookup_name_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_find_vma_proto;
> extern const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_loop_proto;
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> index 83aa431dd52e..52b6e3067986 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c
> @@ -45,6 +45,26 @@ BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sk_alloc_security)
> BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sk_free_security)
> BTF_SET_END(bpf_lsm_current_hooks)
>
> +/* List of LSM hooks that trigger while the socket is properly locked.
> + */
> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_lsm_locked_sockopt_hooks)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_socket_sock_rcv_skb)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sk_clone_security)
From looking how security_sk_clone() is used at sock_copy(),
it has two sk args, one is listen sk and one is the clone.
I think both of them are not locked.
The bpf_lsm_inet_csk_clone below should be enough to
do setsockopt in the new clone?
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sock_graft)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_inet_csk_clone)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_inet_conn_established)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_sctp_bind_connect)
I didn't look at this one, so I can't comment.
Do you have a use case?
> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_lsm_locked_sockopt_hooks)
> +
> +/* List of LSM hooks that trigger while the socket is _not_ locked,
> + * but it's ok to call bpf_{g,s}etsockopt because the socket is still
> + * in the early init phase.
> + */
> +BTF_SET_START(bpf_lsm_unlocked_sockopt_hooks)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_socket_post_create)
> +BTF_ID(func, bpf_lsm_socket_socketpair)
> +BTF_SET_END(bpf_lsm_unlocked_sockopt_hooks)
> +
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-06-17 5:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-10 16:57 [PATCH bpf-next v9 00/10] bpf: cgroup_sock lsm flavor Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 01/10] bpf: add bpf_func_t and trampoline helpers Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-16 19:53 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 02/10] bpf: convert cgroup_bpf.progs to hlist Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-16 19:59 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 03/10] bpf: per-cgroup lsm flavor Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-16 22:25 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-17 18:28 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 22:25 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 04/10] bpf: minimize number of allocated lsm slots per program Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-11 16:53 ` kernel test robot
2022-06-17 0:43 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-17 18:28 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 22:27 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 05/10] bpf: implement BPF_PROG_QUERY for BPF_LSM_CGROUP Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 0:58 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-17 18:28 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 22:29 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-10 16:57 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 06/10] bpf: expose bpf_{g,s}etsockopt to lsm cgroup Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 5:42 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2022-06-17 18:28 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 23:07 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-21 17:51 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-10 16:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 07/10] libbpf: add lsm_cgoup_sock type Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-10 16:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 08/10] libbpf: implement bpf_prog_query_opts Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-10 16:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 09/10] bpftool: implement cgroup tree for BPF_LSM_CGROUP Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-13 12:07 ` Quentin Monnet
2022-06-13 15:53 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-17 5:58 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-06-17 18:28 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-06-10 16:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next v9 10/10] selftests/bpf: lsm_cgroup functional test Stanislav Fomichev
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=20220617054249.iedbzuakyzg67o75@kafai-mbp \
--to=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
/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).