From: Song Liu <songliubraving@meta.com>
To: Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org>
Cc: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
"bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org"
<linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <kernel-team@meta.com>,
"andrii@kernel.org" <andrii@kernel.org>,
"ast@kernel.org" <ast@kernel.org>,
"daniel@iogearbox.net" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"martin.lau@linux.dev" <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
"kpsingh@kernel.org" <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
"mattbobrowski@google.com" <mattbobrowski@google.com>,
"paul@paul-moore.com" <paul@paul-moore.com>,
"jmorris@namei.org" <jmorris@namei.org>,
"serge@hallyn.com" <serge@hallyn.com>,
"memxor@gmail.com" <memxor@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: fs/xattr: Add BPF kfuncs to set and remove xattrs
Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 17:22:23 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <79B1F200-403F-427A-8FAF-01D1DC485452@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250124-luxus-vorsah-5a7a827680ab@brauner>
Hi Christian,
Thanks for the review!
> On Jan 24, 2025, at 1:05 AM, Christian Brauner <brauner@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 09, 2025 at 05:13:41PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:
>> Add the following kfuncs to set and remove xattrs from BPF programs:
>>
>> bpf_set_dentry_xattr
>> bpf_remove_dentry_xattr
>> bpf_set_dentry_xattr_locked
>> bpf_remove_dentry_xattr_locked
>>
>> The _locked version of these kfuncs are called from hooks where
>> dentry->d_inode is already locked. Instead of requiring the user
>> to know which version of the kfuncs to use, the verifier will pick
>> the proper kfunc based on the calling hook.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
[...]
>> +
>> + ret = __vfs_setxattr(&nop_mnt_idmap, dentry, inode, name,
>> + value, value_len, flags);
>> + if (!ret) {
>> + fsnotify_xattr(dentry);
>> +
>> + /* This xattr is set by BPF LSM, so we do not call
>> + * security_inode_post_setxattr. This is the same as
>> + * security_inode_setsecurity().
>> + */
>
> If you did you would risk deadlocks as you could end up calling yourself
> again afaict.
Exactly. Let state it more clearly in the comment.
>
>> + }
>> +out:
>> + if (lock_inode)
>> + inode_unlock(inode);
>> + return ret;
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * bpf_set_dentry_xattr - set a xattr of a dentry
>> + * @dentry: dentry to get xattr from
>> + * @name__str: name of the xattr
>> + * @value_p: xattr value
>> + * @flags: flags to pass into filesystem operations
>> + *
>> + * Set xattr *name__str* of *dentry* to the value in *value_ptr*.
>> + *
>> + * For security reasons, only *name__str* with prefix "security.bpf."
>> + * is allowed.
>> + *
>> + * The caller has not locked dentry->d_inode.
>> + *
>> + * Return: 0 on success, a negative value on error.
>> + */
>> +__bpf_kfunc int bpf_set_dentry_xattr(struct dentry *dentry, const char *name__str,
>> + const struct bpf_dynptr *value_p, int flags)
>> +{
>> + return __bpf_set_dentry_xattr(dentry, name__str, value_p, flags, true);
>> +}
>> +
>> +/**
>> + * bpf_set_dentry_xattr_locked - set a xattr of a dentry
>> + * @dentry: dentry to get xattr from
>> + * @name__str: name of the xattr
>> + * @value_p: xattr value
>> + * @flags: flags to pass into filesystem operations
>> + *
>> + * Set xattr *name__str* of *dentry* to the value in *value_ptr*.
>> + *
>> + * For security reasons, only *name__str* with prefix "security.bpf."
>> + * is allowed.
>> + *
>> + * The caller already locked dentry->d_inode.
>> + *
>> + * Return: 0 on success, a negative value on error.
>> + */
>> +__bpf_kfunc int bpf_set_dentry_xattr_locked(struct dentry *dentry, const char *name__str,
>> + const struct bpf_dynptr *value_p, int flags)
>> +{
>> + return __bpf_set_dentry_xattr(dentry, name__str, value_p, flags, false);
>
> That boolean argument is not needed if you pull
>
> value_len = __bpf_dynptr_size(value_ptr);
> value = __bpf_dynptr_data(value_ptr, value_len);
> if (!value)
> return -EINVAL;
>
> into the two functions and then put:
>
> inode_lock()
> bpf_set_dentry_xattr_unlocked();
> inode_unlock()
>
> for the locked variant. Similar comment applied to the remove functions.
Sounds good. Let me update them in the next version.
Song
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-24 17:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-10 1:13 [PATCH v9 bpf-next 0/7] Enable writing xattr from BPF programs Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 1/7] fs/xattr: bpf: Introduce security.bpf. xattr name prefix Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 2/7] selftests/bpf: Extend test fs_kfuncs to cover security.bpf. xattr names Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 3/7] bpf: lsm: Add two more sleepable hooks Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 4/7] bpf: Extend btf_kfunc_id_set to handle kfunc polymorphism Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 5/7] bpf: Use btf_kfunc_id_set.remap logic for bpf_dynptr_from_skb Song Liu
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 6/7] bpf: fs/xattr: Add BPF kfuncs to set and remove xattrs Song Liu
2025-01-24 9:05 ` Christian Brauner
2025-01-24 17:22 ` Song Liu [this message]
2025-01-10 1:13 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: Test kfuncs that set and remove xattr from BPF programs Song Liu
2025-01-13 22:00 ` [PATCH v9 bpf-next 0/7] Enable writing " Song Liu
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=79B1F200-403F-427A-8FAF-01D1DC485452@fb.com \
--to=songliubraving@meta.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=jmorris@namei.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mattbobrowski@google.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=serge@hallyn.com \
--cc=song@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