From: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
To: elver@google.com, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>, Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Nikola Grcevski <nikola.grcevski@grafana.com>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] bpf: Refactor bpf_tracing_func_proto() and remove bpf_get_probe_write_proto()
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2024 09:59:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20241129090040.2690691-2-elver@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241129090040.2690691-1-elver@google.com>
With bpf_get_probe_write_proto() no longer printing a message, we can
avoid it being a special case with its own permission check.
Refactor bpf_tracing_func_proto() similar to bpf_base_func_proto() to
have a section conditional on bpf_token_capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN), where
the proto for bpf_probe_write_user() is returned. Finally, remove the
unnecessary bpf_get_probe_write_proto().
This simplifies the code, and adding additional CAP_SYS_ADMIN-only
helpers in future avoids duplicating the same CAP_SYS_ADMIN check.
Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Marco Elver <elver@google.com>
Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>
---
v4:
* Call bpf_base_func_proto() before bpf_token_capable() (no protos after
should override bpf_base_func_proto() protos), so we can avoid
indenting the switch-block after bpf_token_capable() (suggested by Alexei).
v3:
* Fix where bpf_base_func_proto() is called - it needs to be last,
because we may override protos (as is e.g. done for
BPF_FUNC_get_smp_processor_id).
v2:
* New patch.
---
kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++------------
1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index 0ab56af2e298..b07d8067aa6e 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -357,14 +357,6 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_probe_write_user_proto = {
.arg3_type = ARG_CONST_SIZE,
};
-static const struct bpf_func_proto *bpf_get_probe_write_proto(void)
-{
- if (!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
- return NULL;
-
- return &bpf_probe_write_user_proto;
-}
-
#define MAX_TRACE_PRINTK_VARARGS 3
#define BPF_TRACE_PRINTK_SIZE 1024
@@ -1417,6 +1409,8 @@ late_initcall(bpf_key_sig_kfuncs_init);
static const struct bpf_func_proto *
bpf_tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
{
+ const struct bpf_func_proto *func_proto;
+
switch (func_id) {
case BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem:
return &bpf_map_lookup_elem_proto;
@@ -1458,9 +1452,6 @@ bpf_tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
return &bpf_perf_event_read_proto;
case BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32:
return &bpf_get_prandom_u32_proto;
- case BPF_FUNC_probe_write_user:
- return security_locked_down(LOCKDOWN_BPF_WRITE_USER) < 0 ?
- NULL : bpf_get_probe_write_proto();
case BPF_FUNC_probe_read_user:
return &bpf_probe_read_user_proto;
case BPF_FUNC_probe_read_kernel:
@@ -1539,7 +1530,22 @@ bpf_tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
case BPF_FUNC_trace_vprintk:
return bpf_get_trace_vprintk_proto();
default:
- return bpf_base_func_proto(func_id, prog);
+ break;
+ }
+
+ func_proto = bpf_base_func_proto(func_id, prog);
+ if (func_proto)
+ return func_proto;
+
+ if (!bpf_token_capable(prog->aux->token, CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
+ return NULL;
+
+ switch (func_id) {
+ case BPF_FUNC_probe_write_user:
+ return security_locked_down(LOCKDOWN_BPF_WRITE_USER) < 0 ?
+ NULL : &bpf_probe_write_user_proto;
+ default:
+ return NULL;
}
}
--
2.47.0.338.g60cca15819-goog
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-11-29 9:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-29 8:59 [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] bpf: Remove bpf_probe_write_user() warning message Marco Elver
2024-11-29 8:59 ` Marco Elver [this message]
2024-11-29 16:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 2/2] bpf: Refactor bpf_tracing_func_proto() and remove bpf_get_probe_write_proto() Daniel Borkmann
2024-11-29 16:35 ` [PATCH bpf-next v4 1/2] bpf: Remove bpf_probe_write_user() warning message Daniel Borkmann
2024-11-29 19:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20241129090040.2690691-2-elver@google.com \
--to=elver@google.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=nikola.grcevski@grafana.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=song@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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).