From: Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, ast@kernel.org,
davem@davemloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/8] bpf: Add support for recursively running cgroup sock filters
Date: Fri, 1 Sep 2017 07:11:11 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170901141111.GE1599492@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170901032754.ogqmgqaqp3dwfdbw@ast-mbp>
Hello, Alexei.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 08:27:56PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > The 2 flags are completely independent. The existing override logic is
> > > unchanged. If a program can not be overridden, then the new recursive
> > > flag is irrelevant.
> >
> > I'm not sure all four combo of the two flags makes sense. Can't we
> > have something simpler like the following?
> >
> > 1. None: No further bpf programs allowed in the subtree.
> >
> > 2. Overridable: If a sub-cgroup installs the same bpf program, this
> > one yields to that one.
> >
> > 3. Recursive: If a sub-cgroup installs the same bpf program, that
> > cgroup program gets run in addition to this one.
> >
> > Note that we can have combinations of overridables and recursives -
> > both allow further programs in the sub-hierarchy and the only
> > distinction is whether that specific program behaves when that
> > happens.
>
> If I understand the proposal correctly in case of:
> A (with recurs) -> B (with override) -> C (with recurse) -> D (with override)
> when something happens in D, you propose to run D,C,A ?
Yes, B gets overridden by C, so the effective progarms are A, C and D.
> With the order of execution from children to parent?
Hmm... I'm not sure about the execution ordering. How these programs
chain would be dependent on the type of the program, right? Would we
be able to use the same chaining order for all types of programs?
> That's a bit a different then what I was proposing with 'multi-prog' flag,
> but the more I think about it the more I like it.
Great.
> In your case detach is sort of transparent to everything around.
> And you would also allow to say 'None' to one of the substrees too, right?
> So something like:
> A (with recurs) -> B (with override) -> C (with recurse) -> D (None) -> E
> would mean that E cannot attach anything and events in E will
> call D->C->A, right?
Yeap.
Thanks.
--
tejun
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-09-01 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-25 19:05 [PATCH v2 net-next 0/8] bpf: Add option to set mark and priority in cgroup sock programs David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 1/8] bpf: Add support for recursively running cgroup sock filters David Ahern
2017-08-26 2:00 ` Daniel Borkmann
2017-08-27 14:22 ` David Ahern
2017-08-26 2:49 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-27 14:49 ` David Ahern
2017-08-28 23:56 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-29 0:43 ` David Ahern
2017-08-29 1:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-29 2:22 ` David Ahern
2017-08-29 4:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-30 1:03 ` David Ahern
2017-08-30 2:58 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-30 3:38 ` David Ahern
2017-08-30 4:11 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-31 14:22 ` Tejun Heo
2017-08-31 20:53 ` David Ahern
2017-09-01 3:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-09-01 14:11 ` Tejun Heo [this message]
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 2/8] bpf: Add mark and priority to sock options that can be set David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 3/8] bpf: Allow cgroup sock filters to use get_current_uid_gid helper David Ahern
2017-08-26 2:30 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 4/8] samples/bpf: Update sock test to allow setting mark and priority David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 5/8] samples/bpf: Add detach option to test_cgrp2_sock David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 6/8] samples/bpf: Add option to dump socket settings David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 7/8] samples/bpf: Add test case for nested socket options David Ahern
2017-08-25 19:05 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 8/8] samples/bpf: Update cgroup socket examples to use uid gid helper David Ahern
2017-08-29 21:53 ` [PATCH v2 net-next 0/8] bpf: Add option to set mark and priority in cgroup sock programs David Miller
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=20170901141111.GE1599492@devbig577.frc2.facebook.com \
--to=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.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 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.