From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pl0-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]:41467 "EHLO
        mail-pl0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751791AbeCOWIv (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Thu, 15 Mar 2018 18:08:51 -0400
Received: by mail-pl0-f47.google.com with SMTP id b7-v6so570645plr.8
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:08:51 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [bpf-next PATCH v2 05/18] bpf: create tcp_bpf_ulp allowing BPF to
 monitor socket TX/RX data
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        davejwatson@fb.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
References: <20180312192034.8039.70022.stgit@john-Precision-Tower-5810>
 <20180312192329.8039.75277.stgit@john-Precision-Tower-5810>
 <20180315215954.wufvwdhcjpntdxbb@ast-mbp>
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1ea47776-6f17-bcda-1422-9f9b5bb060aa@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2018 15:08:37 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20180315215954.wufvwdhcjpntdxbb@ast-mbp>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 03/15/2018 02:59 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 12, 2018 at 12:23:29PM -0700, John Fastabend wrote:
>>  
>> +/* User return codes for SK_MSG prog type. */
>> +enum sk_msg_action {
>> +	SK_MSG_DROP = 0,
>> +	SK_MSG_PASS,
>> +};
> 
> do we really need new enum here?

Nope and as you noticed the actual code uses the
SK_{DROP|PASS} enum. Will remove this.

> It's the same as 'enum sk_action' and SK_DROP == SK_MSG_DROP
> and there will be only drop/pass in both enums.
> Also I don't see where these two new SK_MSG_* are used...
> 
>> +
>> +/* user accessible metadata for SK_MSG packet hook, new fields must
>> + * be added to the end of this structure
>> + */
>> +struct sk_msg_md {
>> +	__u32 data;
>> +	__u32 data_end;
>> +};
> 
> I think it's time for me to ask for forgiveness :)
> I used __u32 for data and data_end only because all other fields
> in __sk_buff were __u32 at the time and I couldn't easily figure out
> how to teach verifier to recognize 8-byte rewrites.
> Unfortunately my mistake stuck and was copied over into xdp.
> Since this is new struct let's do it right and add
> 'void *data, *data_end' here,
> since bpf prog will use them as 'void *' pointers.
> There are no compat issues here, since bpf is always 64-bit.
> 

aha nice catch. Yep lets use 'void*' here. I had forgot about
that discussion and copied them here as well.

>> +static int bpf_map_msg_verdict(int _rc, struct sk_msg_buff *md)
>> +{
>> +	return ((_rc == SK_PASS) ?
>> +	       (md->map ? __SK_REDIRECT : __SK_PASS) :
>> +	       __SK_DROP);
> 
> you're using old SK_PASS here too ;)
> that's to my point of not adding SK_MSG_PASS...
> 

+1

> Overall the patch set looks absolutely great.
> Thank you for working on it.
> 

I'll fixup a few of these small things now and should have
a v3 shortly.