RE: [PATCH bpf v1 1/3] bpf: Move bpf_loop and bpf_for_each_map_elem under CAP_BPF

[John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>]

Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> They would require func_info which needs prog BTF anyway. Loading BTF
> and setting the prog btf_fd while loading the prog indirectly requires
> CAP_BPF, so just to reduce confusion, move both these helpers taking
> callback under bpf_capable() protection as well, since they cannot be
> used without CAP_BPF.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
> ---

This should have a fixes tag IMO. You'll get unexpected results if we
don't have get it backported to the right places.

>  kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 8 ++++----
>  1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> index 1f961f9982d2..d0e80926bac5 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> @@ -1633,10 +1633,6 @@ bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
>  		return &bpf_ringbuf_submit_dynptr_proto;
>  	case BPF_FUNC_ringbuf_discard_dynptr:
>  		return &bpf_ringbuf_discard_dynptr_proto;
> -	case BPF_FUNC_for_each_map_elem:
> -		return &bpf_for_each_map_elem_proto;
> -	case BPF_FUNC_loop:
> -		return &bpf_loop_proto;
>  	case BPF_FUNC_strncmp:
>  		return &bpf_strncmp_proto;
>  	case BPF_FUNC_dynptr_from_mem:
> @@ -1675,6 +1671,10 @@ bpf_base_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id)
>  		return &bpf_timer_cancel_proto;
>  	case BPF_FUNC_kptr_xchg:
>  		return &bpf_kptr_xchg_proto;
> +	case BPF_FUNC_for_each_map_elem:
> +		return &bpf_for_each_map_elem_proto;
> +	case BPF_FUNC_loop:
> +		return &bpf_loop_proto;
>  	default:
>  		break;
>  	}
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>