Re: [PATCH bpf-next v11 09/13] bpf: validate value_type

[Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>]

On 11/6/23 12:12 PM, thinker.li@gmail.com wrote:
> From: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
> 
> A value_type should consist of three components: refcnt, state, and data.
> refcnt and state has been move to struct bpf_struct_ops_common_value to
> make it easier to check the value type.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@gmail.com>
> ---
>   include/linux/bpf.h         | 14 ++++++
>   kernel/bpf/bpf_struct_ops.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>   2 files changed, 74 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h
> index c287f42b2e48..48e97a255945 100644
> --- a/include/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -3231,4 +3231,18 @@ static inline bool bpf_is_subprog(const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>   	return prog->aux->func_idx != 0;
>   }
>   
> +#ifdef CONFIG_BPF_JIT

There is an existing "#if defined(CONFIG_BPF_JIT) && 
defined(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL)" above and a few bpf_struct_ops_*() has already been 
there. Does it need another separate one which is only CONFIG_BPF_JIT here?

> +enum bpf_struct_ops_state {
> +	BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_INIT,
> +	BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_INUSE,
> +	BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_TOBEFREE,
> +	BPF_STRUCT_OPS_STATE_READY,
> +};
> +
> +struct bpf_struct_ops_common_value {
> +	refcount_t refcnt;
> +	enum bpf_struct_ops_state state;
> +};

Do the struct and enum really need to be in ifdef?

> +#endif /* CONFIG_BPF_JIT */
> +