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 1/7] libbpf: remove unnecessary struct_ops prog validity check
Date: Mon, 6 May 2024 17:13:29 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240507001335.1445325-2-andrii@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240507001335.1445325-1-andrii@kernel.org>
libbpf ensures that BPF program references set in map->st_ops->progs[i]
during open phase are always valid STRUCT_OPS programs. This is done in
bpf_object__collect_st_ops_relos(). So there is no need to double-check
that in bpf_map__init_kern_struct_ops().
Simplify the code by removing unnecessary check. Also, we avoid using
local prog variable to keep code similar to the upcoming fix, which adds
similar logic in another part of bpf_map__init_kern_struct_ops().
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
---
tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 13 +++----------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
index a3566a456bc8..7d77a1b158ce 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
@@ -1152,22 +1152,15 @@ static int bpf_map__init_kern_struct_ops(struct bpf_map *map)
return -ENOTSUP;
}
- prog = st_ops->progs[i];
- if (prog) {
+ if (st_ops->progs[i]) {
/* If we had declaratively set struct_ops callback, we need to
- * first validate that it's actually a struct_ops program.
- * And then force its autoload to false, because it doesn't have
+ * force its autoload to false, because it doesn't have
* a chance of succeeding from POV of the current struct_ops map.
* If this program is still referenced somewhere else, though,
* then bpf_object_adjust_struct_ops_autoload() will update its
* autoload accordingly.
*/
- if (!is_valid_st_ops_program(obj, prog)) {
- pr_warn("struct_ops init_kern %s: member %s is declaratively assigned a non-struct_ops program\n",
- map->name, mname);
- return -EINVAL;
- }
- prog->autoload = false;
+ st_ops->progs[i]->autoload = false;
st_ops->progs[i] = NULL;
}
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-05-07 0:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-05-07 0:13 [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] libbpf: further struct_ops fixes and improvements Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` Andrii Nakryiko [this message]
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/7] libbpf: handle yet another corner case of nulling out struct_ops program Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/7] selftests/bpf: add another struct_ops callback use case test Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] libbpf: fix libbpf_strerror_r() handling unknown errors Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/7] libbpf: improve early detection of doomed-to-fail BPF program loading Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: validate struct_ops early failure detection logic Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-07 0:13 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: shorten subtest names for struct_ops_module test Andrii Nakryiko
2024-05-08 0:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] libbpf: further struct_ops fixes and improvements 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=20240507001335.1445325-2-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