From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huaweicloud.com>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Quentin Monnet <quentin@isovalent.com>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf, cgroup: Don't populate prog_attach_flags array when effective query
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 10:28:25 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <783eb0b0-adce-ba31-0b2a-dbc93ea86b23@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <037a6a32-5143-ddad-4a43-bd815280a0ef@huaweicloud.com>
On 9/19/22 6:32 AM, Pu Lehui wrote:
>
>
> On 2022/9/17 8:03, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
>> On 9/14/22 9:17 AM, Pu Lehui wrote:
>>> From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
>>>
>>> Attach flags is only valid for attached progs of this layer cgroup,
>>> but not for effective progs. For querying with EFFECTIVE flags,
>>> exporting attach flags does not make sense. so we don't need to
>>> populate prog_attach_flags array when effective query.
>>
>> prog_attach_flags has been added to 6.0 which is in rc5. It is still
>> doable (and cleaner) to reject prog_attach_flags when it is an
>> effective_query. This should be done regardless of 'type ==
>> BPF_LSM_CGROUP' or not. Something like:
>>
>> if (effective_query && prog_attach_flags)
>> return -EINVAL;
>>
>> Otherwise, the whole prog_attach_flags needs to be set to 0 during
>> effective_query. Please target the change to the bpf tree instead of
>> bpf-next such that this uapi bit can be fixed before 6.0.
>>
>
> Okay, will handle in next version.
Thanks. It will also be useful to comment the uapi's bpf.h and mention
prog_attach_flags should not be set during effective_query.
>
>> Also, the effective_query issue is not limited to the
>> prog_attach_flags? For the older uattr->query.attach_flags, it should
>> be set to 0 also when it is an effective_query, right?
>
> For output uattr->query.attach_flags, we certainly don't need to copy it
> to userspace when effective query. Since we do not utilize
> uattr->query.attach_flags in the cgroup query function, should we need
> to take it as input and reject when it is non-zero in effective query?
> Something like:
> if (effective_query && (prog_attach_flags || attr->query.attach_flags))
No. I don't think the zero attr->query.attach_flags can be enforced
now. It is used as an output value only and its input value has never
been checked. Although the bpftool always sets it to 0 before the
query, checking zero now does not gain much while there is a slight
chance of breaking other users.
Only need to set/output uattr->query.attach_flags as 0 during
effective_query.
>
> For both output and input scenarios, we are faced with the problem that
> there is a ambiguity in attach_flags being 0. When we do not copy to the
> userspace, libbpf will set it to 0 by default, and 0 can mean NONE flag
> attach, or no attach prog. The same is true for input scenarios.
>
> So should we need to define NONE attach flag and redefine the others?
> Such as follow:
> #define BPF_F_ALLOW_NONE (1U << 0)
I would not change the uapi for this. 0 implicitly means no flags or
none. Regardless, this change does not belong to the bpf tree where
this fix will be landing.
> #define BPF_F_ALLOW_OVERRIDE (1U << 1)
> #define BPF_F_ALLOW_MULTI (1U << 2)
> #define BPF_F_REPLACE (1U << 3)
>
> And then attach flags being 0 certainly means no attach any prog.
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-09-19 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-09-14 16:17 [PATCH bpf-next v3 0/2] Fix wrong cgroup attach flags being assigned to effective progs Pu Lehui
2022-09-14 16:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/2] bpf, cgroup: Don't populate prog_attach_flags array when effective query Pu Lehui
2022-09-17 0:03 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-09-19 13:32 ` Pu Lehui
2022-09-19 17:28 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2022-09-14 16:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/2] bpftool: Fix wrong cgroup attach flags being assigned to effective progs Pu Lehui
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=783eb0b0-adce-ba31-0b2a-dbc93ea86b23@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pulehui@huawei.com \
--cc=pulehui@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=quentin@isovalent.com \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@fb.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 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.