From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pg1-f194.google.com (mail-pg1-f194.google.com [209.85.215.194]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3280B3BD225 for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 21:20:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.194 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779225652; cv=none; b=WCDTkRNfPypD0P8E4ni6FTdU25zAx7ACWsgdK+YtmOQzwYJjnJ5D6vl1WWnaq3ewGuSw3fon0Ujjx4gOGjFvh8MH7AtyLvkY+2uztBe3JnPpl/Vl0r8l2d6PTdNVEcpK6SzLd2NNlaOQbjPDSXjqcrltuLLL9TBDnoJF+7MZAmI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1779225652; c=relaxed/simple; bh=O+BWYgzCHwjTvXK7MA4AReNobXoJmXJlYv8uwm5nxvo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=o9PJmDS8mCVH5DKFuWljqlH1OuO1EiQH2wtXQ/XrreBen/HkOsDgp7WWYZHTkhznTP83C88aYlg6YuDC39inAiOY5ERA+G7+2V3ctoeFM3Dt27MLSyHfye01JsGu8MbZpTH6X4y3NAuJ8dOqlN7uNCGnP3NvCBsh8YfBz8dUZL8= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=YQi4rLMb; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.194 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="YQi4rLMb" Received: by mail-pg1-f194.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-c801d732058so1796428a12.1 for ; Tue, 19 May 2026 14:20:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20251104; t=1779225650; x=1779830450; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DQE+A4dldZsiuCry6rodKF1gp5JxyNaxO+EZ49og5TE=; b=YQi4rLMbQW/7Dzls4euHNes99RHcOxD9zr2oTcmyjFb+EJ52aMcWa2v7+htCOkBtIP Qj3LfOIVws2Xo4CgbUnMHE54Y0sVpkOvls8ExCoiaQc1Yiykf2gTG5eI6Y7tKH4mpk6U jE5OWAovAdkQXTQL49TlatzylwX/zVZJHH8twnDonPAIG/3l3rdYnaGtIt3Co0NsvShy YkqdXbDBswGgSE1EZOgShanu6cBTjOO25Ml02GUL5WqqQEYjV+DdecTaac8kCXOE2xuh oYCW1nWkW58cchEfIKu1hayp5kg7nuf0Cm/6jKa17+FQGs/fvNe1fhffTsjliphOo+mL 0a1A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20251104; t=1779225650; x=1779830450; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-gg:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DQE+A4dldZsiuCry6rodKF1gp5JxyNaxO+EZ49og5TE=; b=h3BsNvKnjQc2jIyjjOUwuCuBQxIaPtHSmgYj3g5Ndx2+vkOHLrew40SCh4FwjrKAQO YAzzTWlnXG0JLdNWs7nUXXuf6hqtRrgsNTgS04Xnl7SSrDaYH3O6PdRUzEU961bykYlt MzPFrHkRK8lx2/1hd+/is2ILDXXfvUXtYXFELA3Hm81Li4jHfwnbK6RsjwBZK8n6amLi 5L4L0UvF3TCbMwEIFnlmiVNaQBVPAEM/UFZ35js4BJ3IELayOKuEnSmO2Tep0NLgZkth HSiMVBN8UsEn9XJD1Th4AHh+t/oMSq5OhxKBfFwAQxgL+rCSGNCtfueaafCu2atR+AGc gY+Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzOjSMIIM7ChiesxTWpz+lNe9IAbAkmKuWvpA4GgpVG4+Fa83pe TevOgFRyT+3p3LUCTFwt7XfzYK6MJe1YlqwQAmMTxUD7kpaCgg54U1fp X-Gm-Gg: Acq92OFZ3RRO9+JT7ktJstO7EBoV7CAmG8s7L/1yj9PKxNS4WW1rpptWCi/qdUdOK0n yj78+a8Z1GX95b+m4Hw6xV/3Pi4HAe9Xc+jEhOrlTq2eK2iS6xsjnl58zbhhvOH5/hYXIsMbqve 6uC0edTE1Hj3PPIFnsC99rEyGhMTmXG9FMgYZKOrjq3hgWkdjgbXa+rYo7OJAvfkN8CuNjnHGTY Yq/t5rXCC2AkAowHoQ4qhN7tOeQsR0JdiFJOF6iYqRpHwxAvvrt08XXt2ge+EIQEUlbhM3DPEb7 FWuRUQxBvJKiJ5Y1GtQ+vrq+Ray8Ctn9JE3P1vhdOygcQv1Kiq2WadZg11zGwEiVuimZr5bCnNU F2ifogVUp82KUgPDlqhIm6Mebjnodqz2V0MvgHEnbJkO3gygpep+TYQlCVH4d9hpabrjr0eU6/5 vJyQXcH6w7WVJktbsY X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:914f:b0:3a3:adea:83bc with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-3b22d3369b4mr18265361637.15.1779225650394; Tue, 19 May 2026 14:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2a03:2880:2ff:46::]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-83f19c7809esm24275139b3a.44.2026.05.19.14.20.49 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 19 May 2026 14:20:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 19 May 2026 14:20:49 -0700 From: Stanislav Fomichev To: Mahe Tardy Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jordan@jrife.io, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 3/6] bpf: add bpf_icmp_send kfunc Message-ID: References: <20260518122842.218522-1-mahe.tardy@gmail.com> <20260518122842.218522-4-mahe.tardy@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On 05/18, Mahe Tardy wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 09:17:45AM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote: > > On 05/18, Mahe Tardy wrote: > > > This is needed in the context of Tetragon to provide improved feedback > > > (in contrast to just dropping packets) to east-west traffic when blocked > > > by policies using cgroup_skb programs. We also extend this kfunc to tc > > > program as a convenience. > > > > > > This reuses concepts from netfilter reject target codepath with the > > > differences that: > > > * Packets are cloned since the BPF user can still let the packet pass > > > (SK_PASS from the cgroup_skb progs for example) and the current skb > > > need to stay untouched (cgroup_skb hooks only allow read-only skb > > > payload). > > > * We protect against recursion since the kfunc, by generating an ICMP > > > error message, could retrigger the BPF prog that invoked it. > > > > > > For now, we support cgroup_skb and tc program types. For cgroup_skb and > > > tc egress, almost everything should be good. However for tc ingress: > > > - packet will not be routed yet: need to set the net device for > > > icmp_send, thus the call to ip[6]_route_reply_fill_dst. > > > - fragments could trigger hook: icmp_send will only reply to fragment 0. > > > - ensure the ip headers is linearized before processing, and zero out > > > the SKB control block after cloning to prevent icmp_send()/icmpv6_send() > > > from misinterpreting garbage data as IP options. > > > > > > Only ICMP_DEST_UNREACH and ICMPV6_DEST_UNREACH are currently supported. > > > The interface accepts a type parameter to facilitate future extension to > > > other ICMP control message types. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mahe Tardy > > > --- > > > net/core/filter.c | 118 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > > 1 file changed, 118 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c > > > index 9590877b0714..843fa775596b 100644 > > > --- a/net/core/filter.c > > > +++ b/net/core/filter.c > > > @@ -84,6 +84,8 @@ > > > #include > > > #include > > > #include > > > +#include > > > +#include > > > > > > #include "dev.h" > > > > > > @@ -12464,6 +12466,110 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_xdp_pull_data(struct xdp_md *x, u32 len) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(bool, bpf_icmp_send_in_progress); > > > + > > > +/** > > > + * bpf_icmp_send - Send an ICMP control message > > > + * @skb_ctx: Packet that triggered the control message > > > + * @type: ICMP type (only ICMP_DEST_UNREACH/ICMPV6_DEST_UNREACH supported) > > > + * @code: ICMP code (0-15 for IPv4, 0-6 for IPv6) > > > + * > > > + * Sends an ICMP control message in response to the packet. The original packet > > > + * is cloned before sending the ICMP message, so the BPF program can still let > > > + * the packet pass if desired. > > > + * > > > + * Currently only ICMP_DEST_UNREACH (IPv4) and ICMPV6_DEST_UNREACH (IPv6) are > > > + * supported. > > > + * > > > + * Recursion protection: If called from a context that would trigger recursion > > > + * (e.g., root cgroup processing its own ICMP packets), returns -EBUSY on > > > + * re-entry. > > > + * > > > + * Return: 0 on success, negative error code on failure: > > > + * -EINVAL: Invalid code parameter > > > + * -EBADMSG: Packet too short or malformed > > > + * -ENOMEM: Memory allocation failed > > > + * -EBUSY: Recursion detected > > > + * -EHOSTUNREACH: Routing failed > > > + * -EPROTONOSUPPORT: Non-IP protocol > > > + * -EOPNOTSUPP: Unsupported ICMP type > > > + */ > > > +__bpf_kfunc int bpf_icmp_send(struct __sk_buff *skb_ctx, int type, int code) > > > +{ > > > + struct sk_buff *skb = (struct sk_buff *)skb_ctx; > > > + struct sk_buff *nskb; > > > + bool *in_progress; > > > + > > > + in_progress = this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_icmp_send_in_progress); > > > + if (*in_progress) > > > + return -EBUSY; > > > + > > > + switch (skb->protocol) { > > > +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_INET) > > > + case htons(ETH_P_IP): > > > + if (type != ICMP_DEST_UNREACH) > > > + return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > + if (code < 0 || code > NR_ICMP_UNREACH) > > > + return -EINVAL; > > > + > > > + nskb = skb_clone(skb, GFP_ATOMIC); > > > + if (!nskb) > > > + return -ENOMEM; > > > + > > > + if (!pskb_network_may_pull(nskb, sizeof(struct iphdr))) { > > > + kfree_skb(nskb); > > > + return -EBADMSG; > > > + } > > > + > > > + if (!skb_dst(nskb) && ip_route_reply_fill_dst(nskb) < 0) { > > > + kfree_skb(nskb); > > > + return -EHOSTUNREACH; > > > + } > > > + > > > + memset(IPCB(nskb), 0, sizeof(struct inet_skb_parm)); > > > + > > > + *in_progress = true; > > > + icmp_send(nskb, type, code, 0); > > > + *in_progress = false; > > > > [..] > > > > > + kfree_skb(nskb); > > > > I was going to suggest to use consume_skb here, I think it is a better fit? > > Yeah correct, I can replace it with consume_skb, didn't know about it, > thanks. > > > But I'm not sure why you do the clone here, I don't see any requirement from > > the icmp_send side, can you clarify? Is it because of the pull? > > From the icmp_send side I think it's fine, however, this part might > touch the original packet, especially ip_route_reply_fill_dst: > > > if (!pskb_network_may_pull(nskb, sizeof(struct iphdr))) { > kfree_skb(nskb); > return -EBADMSG; > } > > if (!skb_dst(nskb) && ip_route_reply_fill_dst(nskb) < 0) { > kfree_skb(nskb); > return -EHOSTUNREACH; > } > > memset(IPCB(nskb), 0, sizeof(struct inet_skb_parm)); > > > All of this is mostly there because we allow this kfunc for tc and > especially tc ingress. At this stage, the skb might not have a routing > entry yet and icmp_send needs to know the dev from this or fail > silently. This is the original reason why I added the the net patches > (patch 1 and 2) and it was also spotted by Sashiko when I tried to > remove them[^1]. > > [^1]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20260515202358.20252C2BCB0@smtp.kernel.org/ Thanks for the details. Then yeah, let's just do the consume_skb part, the rest looks good.