From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-wm1-f46.google.com (mail-wm1-f46.google.com [209.85.128.46]) (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 58599175D48; Wed, 2 Apr 2025 19:25:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743621937; cv=none; b=SVR67uCDlVKA3rBtg6NjNIeRv5mgSoQxhDfyt/dtxL189bEzrnp9NHAPf1RIcOW69HT/kiVeN0VcBHA1L4J1KQS0pwqISSlfvpnUvCSMeOiqqEGsv2XoBv/7cqc2ZHeHGGqDu40QMtweORn2hv+cuIDaDN4nQIRFEKvYONMkZWU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1743621937; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ej1bUWBsuRw7RZa8MaA4KjRgioZePMmuY0FeQb+3F28=; h=From:Date:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=sa6k2jnG8sH5yWqTx2sGKkCGeByMPMhxElprPjVGeJ1XaUFHd5FtRBG9rqC7CmXszibvbrYgv2heWbCClLUkh1869iH777gTZazkHbDY+RB4D3BHJAqPsU10SlrAocgzCKs4iqw2dH3/pZXqtPHkfzkJhR3ZGphboqg7bacpzLk= 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=ItTpXoo+; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.46 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="ItTpXoo+" Received: by mail-wm1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43cf3192f3bso816935e9.1; Wed, 02 Apr 2025 12:25:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1743621933; x=1744226733; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:date:from:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iR/24eGiQXTI3l3k6htvxnai/tmoU/Su7VysY9lW7Dc=; b=ItTpXoo+rkbk6a32OjQi9iSmJGMpkadPs+Mi30+UUHyifsswjfwhphil5I9QfEQoRT mr4rs9OuwaYQJyPjIlM8msCZGHEm1ItpNniVWndYCndXiw2I9z6pdm3X3QV3ReLSfJtf 4HqZXVgMBX7mfnJH100FYp7edpK/kmM/ZzyL1G+CUaP1BZIl+1pcuDDFbPrb+juOW3tA 3uoquH1dwt/seLBgOe/x8Hdn8gniYlMQo9igWo1pp16pVklG5ay0y2w9/lidrU/yQl8R VHa9lPBTYFcy+WiLMxNqYA2JlioFFkTRFW0ATy/dmzHcAzrXZuv/6t4qtO7LGHs6bT0Z VcPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1743621933; x=1744226733; h=in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc:to:date:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=iR/24eGiQXTI3l3k6htvxnai/tmoU/Su7VysY9lW7Dc=; b=DWizRGEktKYTX3Ox4LWi+RBL3bvLzUdbBlbV6x8N13X2mQxaXqX5xqnsYtcUdZ8w91 ogVgTmV2+v40PSXXmiBzOKjxEJe5YOYZn6T66FIS6OrjBozt5JG0yXe9KI06SjVkXQL6 UoUoeDXf74bLamL7TUTc+eg7ZIlKmNnqLen4KHpsdFqP2PzxKNr+mNVC48k+cUxUrDnG oUGN5G+NamLnlTQHDF/S5GzjMDiwI1guIpSX6596yG+itTsMhoRIAXJVGhydWYAx/ew5 4+nX+tJvdPnjbVuHJlxvY9d9Av3cOP5PrXdUIgYiNjc1Luqzu8gw8ivv86kn+QY4zBva xbng== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVLnTuemuWWDJKqyVUaCA7pIlHIqZ9qs3JKFAY8BA/9AGTolI2/c/AO5oZ878Mj50gaslxe3VO0d2+nUeUSMhg+G/21@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCVZ9kGwSI86DN7X7oXETQw76Zog0EicObsqrkOsVUhRnViihdWfu0/JPfcv5sow5Au6NV6gAyUC7B8eBzif@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCWzv++G6gR9ZCIrJN+bXmIFo8woLmMIe3a1Dr+wNBq4xLGRwVMUedt+oNc4hW948P9D0zQ=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyTBS1X4O8HqEbHUiC4PsW8El+GWjmQikUH9XBwkotUe6F3qkJi BZ03UB4wQPgqfhyWEJcN7uSqd6xxGCQ91/6uKG75kHEAmGcgoCcp X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctX0xmqLXMGMsql8K3cooz/EzczA3buWOsIR+/dJjyQcCRjsL9S6dNzB9L2oqd OkUnoKfoixFNL32w3nSDOKC3r9Mf1DK7zHj0rA/Spv+pEFnWZCBcNkF0C38nibXRdRUk4ivsNGD vWX/4d4l85HkwWLykGOom7cKeSKKBcMQM92sIoVxyG6NrPmwrVnYDArrc7bR9PL0piODPcvGtXt NT3V3Mmu2BfpLGPNhsF2E6UvZYu6i2KYh0d7VGz0tGPjsF8y3b3DHXnREYx/GBR/fDzAUCxgIhr zLkCtGBOUfYwsqZi7nDDtXpqA1z6E6lbBLT0fkU+eg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IF9KnT7M8WAsGh614hoSpdPQS7E6gWfXTYWOSBlx0LYy8oc/2MxXGQ90VSTtdXsY5oEEUjcOQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:4747:b0:43d:82c:2b23 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-43db62b726amr147915355e9.23.1743621933261; Wed, 02 Apr 2025 12:25:33 -0700 (PDT) Received: from krava ([173.38.220.50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-43eb5fc1b81sm30282045e9.5.2025.04.02.12.25.32 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Apr 2025 12:25:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Jiri Olsa X-Google-Original-From: Jiri Olsa Date: Wed, 2 Apr 2025 21:25:31 +0200 To: Jiri Olsa , Timo Beckers Cc: Andrii Nakryiko , Tao Chen , song@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, mhiramat@kernel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, laoar.shao@gmail.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: Check link_create parameter for multi_uprobe Message-ID: References: <20250331094745.336010-1-chen.dylane@linux.dev> <20250331094745.336010-2-chen.dylane@linux.dev> <918395a6-122c-4fb0-9761-892b8020b95e@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 09:19:45PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2025 at 11:01:48AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Tue, Apr 01, 2025 at 03:06:22PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > > On Tue, Apr 1, 2025 at 5:40 AM Tao Chen wrote: > > > > > > > > 在 2025/4/1 19:03, Jiri Olsa 写道: > > > > > On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 05:47:45PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote: > > > > >> The target_fd and flags in link_create no used in multi_uprobe > > > > >> , return -EINVAL if they assigned, keep it same as other link > > > > >> attach apis. > > > > >> > > > > >> Fixes: 89ae89f53d20 ("bpf: Add multi uprobe link") > > > > >> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen > > > > >> --- > > > > >> kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 3 +++ > > > > >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > >> > > > > >> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > > >> index 2f206a2a2..f7ebf17e3 100644 > > > > >> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > > >> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c > > > > >> @@ -3385,6 +3385,9 @@ int bpf_uprobe_multi_link_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *pr > > > > >> if (sizeof(u64) != sizeof(void *)) > > > > >> return -EOPNOTSUPP; > > > > >> > > > > >> + if (attr->link_create.target_fd || attr->link_create.flags) > > > > >> + return -EINVAL; > > > > > > > > > > I think the CI is failing because usdt code does uprobe multi detection > > > > > with target_fd = -1 and it fails and perf-uprobe fallback will fail on > > > > > not having enough file descriptors > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi jiri > > > > > > > > As you said, i found it, thanks. > > > > > > > > static int probe_uprobe_multi_link(int token_fd) > > > > { > > > > LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_prog_load_opts, load_opts, > > > > .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI, > > > > .token_fd = token_fd, > > > > .prog_flags = token_fd ? BPF_F_TOKEN_FD : 0, > > > > ); > > > > LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_link_create_opts, link_opts); > > > > struct bpf_insn insns[] = { > > > > BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > > > > BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > > > > }; > > > > int prog_fd, link_fd, err; > > > > unsigned long offset = 0; > > > > > > > > prog_fd = bpf_prog_load(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, NULL, "GPL", > > > > insns, ARRAY_SIZE(insns), &load_opts); > > > > if (prog_fd < 0) > > > > return -errno; > > > > > > > > /* Creating uprobe in '/' binary should fail with -EBADF. */ > > > > link_opts.uprobe_multi.path = "/"; > > > > link_opts.uprobe_multi.offsets = &offset; > > > > link_opts.uprobe_multi.cnt = 1; > > > > > > > > link_fd = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, -1, BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI, > > > > &link_opts); > > > > > > > > > but I think at this stage we will brake some user apps by introducing > > > > > this check, link ebpf go library, which passes 0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > So is it ok just check the flags? > > > > > > good catch, Jiri! Yep, let's validate just flags? > > > > I think so.. I'll test that with ebpf/go to make sure we are safe > > at least there ;-) I'll let you know > > sorry, got stuck.. link_create.flags are initialized to zero, > so I think flags check should be fine (at least for ebpf/go) sry forgot.. adding Timo to the loop (ebpf/go) jirka