public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, song@kernel.org,
	kernel-team@meta.com, andrii@kernel.org, sinquersw@gmail.com,
	kuifeng@meta.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/8] bpf: enable detaching links of struct_ops objects.
Date: Tue, 28 May 2024 23:17:31 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20b1a16e-2614-4022-9389-c28b332a29fb@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240524223036.318800-3-thinker.li@gmail.com>

On 5/24/24 3:30 PM, Kui-Feng Lee wrote:
> +static int bpf_struct_ops_map_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link)
> +{
> +	struct bpf_struct_ops_link *st_link = container_of(link, struct bpf_struct_ops_link, link);
> +	struct bpf_struct_ops_map *st_map;
> +	struct bpf_map *map;
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&update_mutex);

update_mutex is needed to detach.

> +
> +	map = rcu_dereference_protected(st_link->map, lockdep_is_held(&update_mutex));
> +	if (!map) {
> +		mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +	st_map = container_of(map, struct bpf_struct_ops_map, map);
> +
> +	st_map->st_ops_desc->st_ops->unreg(&st_map->kvalue.data, link);
> +
> +	rcu_assign_pointer(st_link->map, NULL);
> +	/* Pair with bpf_map_get() in bpf_struct_ops_link_create() or
> +	 * bpf_map_inc() in bpf_struct_ops_map_link_update().
> +	 */
> +	bpf_map_put(&st_map->map);
> +
> +	mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
> +
> +	return 0;
> +}
> +
>   static const struct bpf_link_ops bpf_struct_ops_map_lops = {
>   	.dealloc = bpf_struct_ops_map_link_dealloc,
> +	.detach = bpf_struct_ops_map_link_detach,
>   	.show_fdinfo = bpf_struct_ops_map_link_show_fdinfo,
>   	.fill_link_info = bpf_struct_ops_map_link_fill_link_info,
>   	.update_map = bpf_struct_ops_map_link_update,
> @@ -1176,13 +1208,22 @@ int bpf_struct_ops_link_create(union bpf_attr *attr)
>   	if (err)
>   		goto err_out;
>   
> +	/* Init link->map before calling reg() in case being detached
> +	 * immediately.
> +	 */

With update_mutex held in link_create here, the parallel detach can still happen 
before the link is fully initialized (the link->map pointer here in particular)?

> +	RCU_INIT_POINTER(link->map, map);
> +
> +	mutex_lock(&update_mutex);
>   	err = st_map->st_ops_desc->st_ops->reg(st_map->kvalue.data, &link->link);
>   	if (err) {
> +		RCU_INIT_POINTER(link->map, NULL);

I was hoping by holding the the update_mutex, it can avoid this link->map init 
dance, like RCU_INIT_POINTER(link->map, map) above and then resetting here on 
the error case.

> +		mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);
>   		bpf_link_cleanup(&link_primer);
> +		/* The link has been free by bpf_link_cleanup() */
>   		link = NULL;
>   		goto err_out;
>   	}
> -	RCU_INIT_POINTER(link->map, map);

If only init link->map once here like the existing code (and the init is 
protected by the update_mutex), the subsystem should not be able to detach until 
the link->map is fully initialized.

or I am missing something obvious. Can you explain why this link->map init dance 
is still needed?

> +	mutex_unlock(&update_mutex);


  reply	other threads:[~2024-05-29  6:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-05-24 22:30 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/8] Notify user space when a struct_ops object is detached/unregistered Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/8] bpf: pass bpf_struct_ops_link to callbacks in bpf_struct_ops Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/8] bpf: enable detaching links of struct_ops objects Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-29  6:17   ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2024-05-29 15:04     ` Kuifeng Lee
2024-05-29 22:38       ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-05-29 23:26         ` Kuifeng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 3/8] bpf: support epoll from bpf struct_ops links Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 4/8] bpf: export bpf_link_inc_not_zero Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 5/8] selftests/bpf: test struct_ops with epoll Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-29 22:26   ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 6/8] selftests/bpf: detach a struct_ops link from the subsystem managing it Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-29 21:51   ` Martin KaFai Lau
     [not found]     ` <CAHE2DV0RBf9JbkmngsdKdER5F2KmUXwY_JH44Z09DsY0VNa37A@mail.gmail.com>
2024-05-30 17:53       ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-05-30 19:34         ` Kuifeng Lee
2024-05-30 19:42           ` Kuifeng Lee
2024-05-30 20:19             ` Martin KaFai Lau
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 7/8] selftests/bpf: make sure bpf_testmod handling racing link destroying well Kui-Feng Lee
2024-05-24 22:30 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 8/8] bpftool: Change pid_iter.bpf.c to comply with the change of bpf_link_fops Kui-Feng Lee

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=20b1a16e-2614-4022-9389-c28b332a29fb@linux.dev \
    --to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
    --cc=kuifeng@meta.com \
    --cc=sinquersw@gmail.com \
    --cc=song@kernel.org \
    --cc=thinker.li@gmail.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