From: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
yhs@meta.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org,
sdf@google.com, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com,
tj@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/8] bpf: Enable cpumasks to be queried and used as kptrs
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2023 23:50:47 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y8ort5rBVuHD6cdt@maniforge.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230120054823.bldnkx5tl3jxejm3@MacBook-Pro-6.local.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 09:48:23PM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 05:58:29PM -0600, David Vernet wrote:
> > silently check for and ignore these cases at runtime. When we have e.g.
> > per-argument kfunc flags, it might be helpful to add another KF_CPU-type
> > flag that specifies that the verifier should validate that it's a valid
> > CPU.
>
> ...
>
> > +void bpf_cpumask_set_cpu(u32 cpu, struct bpf_cpumask *cpumask)
> > +{
> > + if (!cpu_valid(cpu))
> > + return;
> > +
> > + cpumask_set_cpu(cpu, (struct cpumask *)cpumask);
> > +}
>
> ...
>
> > +void bpf_cpumask_clear_cpu(u32 cpu, struct bpf_cpumask *cpumask)
> > +{
> > + if (!cpu_valid(cpu))
> > + return;
>
> I don't think we'll be able to get rid of this with KF_CPU or special suffix.
> The argument might be a variable and not a constant at the verification time.
> We would have to allow passing unknown vars otherwise the UX will be too restrictive,
> so this run-time check would have to stay.
Makes sense. We'll just leave it as is then and document that passing in
cpu >= nr_cpus is silently ignored for any kfunc taking a cpu argument.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-01-20 5:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-19 23:58 [PATCH bpf-next 0/8] Enable cpumasks to be used as kptrs David Vernet
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/8] bpf: Enable annotating trusted nested pointers David Vernet
2023-01-20 1:14 ` kernel test robot
2023-01-20 2:27 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 6:01 ` kernel test robot
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/8] bpf: Allow trusted args to walk struct when checking BTF IDs David Vernet
2023-01-20 4:58 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-01-20 5:23 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:40 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 5:56 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-01-20 6:14 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 14:56 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 15:26 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 16:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/8] bpf: Disallow NULL PTR_TO_MEM for trusted kfuncs David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:21 ` Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
2023-01-20 5:31 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:44 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/8] bpf: Enable cpumasks to be queried and used as kptrs David Vernet
2023-01-20 2:36 ` kernel test robot
2023-01-20 3:39 ` David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:48 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 5:50 ` David Vernet [this message]
2023-01-20 5:52 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 6:22 ` kernel test robot
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/8] selftests/bpf: Add nested trust selftests suite David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:51 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 5:56 ` David Vernet
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/8] selftests/bpf: Add selftest suite for cpumask kfuncs David Vernet
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/8] bpf/docs: Document cpumask kfuncs in a new file David Vernet
2023-01-20 5:59 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-01-20 6:01 ` David Vernet
2023-01-19 23:58 ` [PATCH bpf-next 8/8] bpf/docs: Document how nested trusted fields may be defined David Vernet
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=Y8ort5rBVuHD6cdt@maniforge.lan \
--to=void@manifault.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
--cc=yhs@meta.com \
/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