From: David Marchevsky <david.marchevsky@linux.dev>
To: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
kernel-team@fb.com, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Remove a WARN_ON_ONCE warning related to local kptr
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2023 01:16:25 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8c020115-399c-14de-0282-593f66e34c17@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230823225556.1292811-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev>
On 8/23/23 6:55 PM, Yonghong Song wrote:
> Currently, in function bpf_obj_free_fields(), for local kptr,
> a warning will be issued if the struct does not contain any
> special fields. But actually the kernel seems totally okay
> with a local kptr without any special fields. Permitting
> no special fields also aligns with future percpu kptr which
> also allows no special fields.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
> ---
Weird. Looking at the WARN_ON_ONCE now, I can't understand why I added it,
and history of the series adding it doesn't have any clues. The same series
added pointee_struct_meta ? pointee_struct_meta->record : NULL two lines below,
so it's not clear what I was trying to protect against.
Anyways, I agree that:
* We can have a struct with a special __kptr field that points to some
local kptr type
* That local kptr 'pointee' type doesn't need to have any special fields, in
which case pointee_struct_meta will rightly be NULL, a NULL record will be
passed to __bpf_obj_drop_impl, which will handle it correctly.
* In fact this is the same logic that bpf_obj_drop_impl does before calling
its double-underscore cousin
LGTM
Acked-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 1 -
> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>
> NOTE: I didn't put a fix tag since except the warning
> there is no correctness issue here.
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 10666d17b9e3..ebeb0695305a 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -657,7 +657,6 @@ void bpf_obj_free_fields(const struct btf_record *rec, void *obj)
> if (!btf_is_kernel(field->kptr.btf)) {
> pointee_struct_meta = btf_find_struct_meta(field->kptr.btf,
> field->kptr.btf_id);
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(!pointee_struct_meta);
> migrate_disable();
> __bpf_obj_drop_impl(xchgd_field, pointee_struct_meta ?
> pointee_struct_meta->record :
prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-24 5:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-23 22:55 [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Remove a WARN_ON_ONCE warning related to local kptr Yonghong Song
2023-08-23 22:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add a local kptr test with no special fields Yonghong Song
2023-08-24 5:31 ` David Marchevsky
2023-08-24 5:56 ` Yonghong Song
2023-08-24 5:16 ` David Marchevsky [this message]
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=8c020115-399c-14de-0282-593f66e34c17@linux.dev \
--to=david.marchevsky@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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