From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-99.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.99]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A0772E414; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 07:16:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708413371; cv=none; b=HNX3DjHzNe9msufQrBO9WHz3ae0a7uaQvklSCRkvU6OStbxW03ZriicSSpIvJjNVYV26CmGmzhDjDbTNb8s6S69cVXkRlXtQevkRi7bLpUrdLqGH5SIAsyei4+mILxUoyNcnCGjR/MKOFmyqs5iR5mUlSL6svN5IrwlGCN4jKiY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1708413371; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cu/T1BOs7iJNYFJOKO7j3SL4H6llYux4Y5Jm+sXsTL4=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=eqIc88PGczjo9tKtzSmCxY7wwKZ4ds5MqfFVbextZGYepvVn75GON6WjZnfs7cdchVJVnb/ho2MMMvC7CMQQGefPmhsiuPTKnIgKiGTGlD3sB63EXu/RVd5pVlZtDdKy1DrpChT2WmuUYdvxgk9S5+Ir4zQo6bHvmC9Clh2lwCE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=kWA+ZmhB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.99 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="kWA+ZmhB" DKIM-Signature:v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1708413365; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:From:Content-Type; bh=aRVK0RBqvwU9ESK4wUCOXJ5JGHcyUKkaoM4QJ3fPRkU=; b=kWA+ZmhB9lo4K/EAOIii30ukVBvjUbQWy+Jvm3l7T3FJYZvcYARr1rVOPZixaFA6y8WnkNybUM2QkZZXxa0G13uR4ogobpgi7vWWA58f7VtCuP/OrrGWtxQTtFdyi8sqFJ7mp1Mkko6MG56dHe0eyWNOodmUIyT1ZZLlrAxp+8o= X-Alimail-AntiSpam:AC=PASS;BC=-1|-1;BR=01201311R831e4;CH=green;DM=||false|;DS=||;FP=0|-1|-1|-1|0|-1|-1|-1;HT=ay29a033018046060;MF=alibuda@linux.alibaba.com;NM=1;PH=DS;RN=14;SR=0;TI=SMTPD_---0W0w0R3Y_1708413363; Received: from 30.221.148.206(mailfrom:alibuda@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0W0w0R3Y_1708413363) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 15:16:05 +0800 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 15:16:01 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC nf-next v5 0/2] netfilter: bpf: support prog update Content-Language: en-US To: Pablo Neira Ayuso , Quentin Deslandes Cc: kadlec@netfilter.org, fw@strlen.de, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, coreteam@netfilter.org, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, ast@kernel.org References: <1704175877-28298-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <70114fff-43bd-4e27-9abf-45345624042c@naccy.de> From: "D. Wythe" In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 2/15/24 12:41 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Wed, Feb 14, 2024 at 05:10:46PM +0100, Quentin Deslandes wrote: >> On 2024-01-02 07:11, D. Wythe wrote: >>> From: "D. Wythe" >>> >>> This patches attempt to implements updating of progs within >>> bpf netfilter link, allowing user update their ebpf netfilter >>> prog in hot update manner. >>> >>> Besides, a corresponding test case has been added to verify >>> whether the update works. >>> -- >>> v1: >>> 1. remove unnecessary context, access the prog directly via rcu. >>> 2. remove synchronize_rcu(), dealloc the nf_link via kfree_rcu. >>> 3. check the dead flag during the update. >>> -- >>> v1->v2: >>> 1. remove unnecessary nf_prog, accessing nf_link->link.prog in direct. >>> -- >>> v2->v3: >>> 1. access nf_link->link.prog via rcu_dereference_raw to avoid warning. >>> -- >>> v3->v4: >>> 1. remove mutex for link update, as it is unnecessary and can be replaced >>> by atomic operations. >>> -- >>> v4->v5: >>> 1. fix error retval check on cmpxhcg >>> >>> D. Wythe (2): >>> netfilter: bpf: support prog update >>> selftests/bpf: Add netfilter link prog update test >>> >>> net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c | 50 ++++++++----- >>> .../bpf/prog_tests/netfilter_link_update_prog.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> .../bpf/progs/test_netfilter_link_update_prog.c | 24 +++++++ >>> 3 files changed, 141 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-) >>> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/netfilter_link_update_prog.c >>> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_netfilter_link_update_prog.c >>> >> It seems this patch has been forgotten, hopefully this answer >> will give it more visibility. >> >> I've applied this change on 6.8.0-rc4 and tested BPF_LINK_UPDATE >> with bpfilter and everything seems alright. > Just post it without RFC tag. Glad to know that, I will send a formal version soon. D. Wythe