public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
To: <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	<martin.lau@kernel.org>
Cc: <andrii@kernel.org>, <kernel-team@meta.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: inline map creation logic in map_create() function
Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2023 15:35:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230613223533.3689589-3-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230613223533.3689589-1-andrii@kernel.org>

Currently find_and_alloc_map() performs two separate functions: some
argument sanity checking and partial map creation workflow hanling.
Neither of those functions are self-sufficient and are augmented by
further checks and initialization logic in the caller (map_create()
function). So unify all the sanity checks, permission checks, and
creation and initialization logic in one linear piece of code in
map_create() instead. This also make it easier to further enhance
permission checks and keep them located in one place.

Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
 kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 57 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------------
 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
index 1cc590101e19..be885d547cde 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
@@ -109,37 +109,6 @@ const struct bpf_map_ops bpf_map_offload_ops = {
 	.map_mem_usage = bpf_map_offload_map_mem_usage,
 };
 
-static struct bpf_map *find_and_alloc_map(union bpf_attr *attr)
-{
-	const struct bpf_map_ops *ops;
-	u32 type = attr->map_type;
-	struct bpf_map *map;
-	int err;
-
-	if (type >= ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_map_types))
-		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
-	type = array_index_nospec(type, ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_map_types));
-	ops = bpf_map_types[type];
-	if (!ops)
-		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
-
-	if (ops->map_alloc_check) {
-		err = ops->map_alloc_check(attr);
-		if (err)
-			return ERR_PTR(err);
-	}
-	if (attr->map_ifindex)
-		ops = &bpf_map_offload_ops;
-	if (!ops->map_mem_usage)
-		return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
-	map = ops->map_alloc(attr);
-	if (IS_ERR(map))
-		return map;
-	map->ops = ops;
-	map->map_type = type;
-	return map;
-}
-
 static void bpf_map_write_active_inc(struct bpf_map *map)
 {
 	atomic64_inc(&map->writecnt);
@@ -1127,7 +1096,9 @@ static int map_check_btf(struct bpf_map *map, const struct btf *btf,
 /* called via syscall */
 static int map_create(union bpf_attr *attr)
 {
+	const struct bpf_map_ops *ops;
 	int numa_node = bpf_map_attr_numa_node(attr);
+	u32 map_type = attr->map_type;
 	struct bpf_map *map;
 	int f_flags;
 	int err;
@@ -1157,6 +1128,25 @@ static int map_create(union bpf_attr *attr)
 	     !node_online(numa_node)))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	/* find map type and init map: hashtable vs rbtree vs bloom vs ... */
+	map_type = attr->map_type;
+	if (map_type >= ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_map_types))
+		return -EINVAL;
+	map_type = array_index_nospec(map_type, ARRAY_SIZE(bpf_map_types));
+	ops = bpf_map_types[map_type];
+	if (!ops)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
+	if (ops->map_alloc_check) {
+		err = ops->map_alloc_check(attr);
+		if (err)
+			return err;
+	}
+	if (attr->map_ifindex)
+		ops = &bpf_map_offload_ops;
+	if (!ops->map_mem_usage)
+		return -EINVAL;
+
 	/* Intent here is for unprivileged_bpf_disabled to block BPF map
 	 * creation for unprivileged users; other actions depend
 	 * on fd availability and access to bpffs, so are dependent on
@@ -1166,10 +1156,11 @@ static int map_create(union bpf_attr *attr)
 	if (sysctl_unprivileged_bpf_disabled && !bpf_capable())
 		return -EPERM;
 
-	/* find map type and init map: hashtable vs rbtree vs bloom vs ... */
-	map = find_and_alloc_map(attr);
+	map = ops->map_alloc(attr);
 	if (IS_ERR(map))
 		return PTR_ERR(map);
+	map->ops = ops;
+	map->map_type = map_type;
 
 	err = bpf_obj_name_cpy(map->name, attr->map_name,
 			       sizeof(attr->map_name));
-- 
2.34.1


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-06-13 22:35 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-13 22:35 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Clean up BPF permissions checks Andrii Nakryiko
2023-06-13 22:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf: move unprivileged checks into map_create() and bpf_prog_load() Andrii Nakryiko
2023-06-13 22:35 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2023-06-13 22:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: centralize permissions checks for all BPF map types Andrii Nakryiko
2023-06-13 22:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] bpf: keep BPF_PROG_LOAD permission checks clear of validations Andrii Nakryiko
2023-06-14 22:08 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Clean up BPF permissions checks Stanislav Fomichev
2023-06-19 12:10 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=20230613223533.3689589-3-andrii@kernel.org \
    --to=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=martin.lau@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