Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] xdp: Support specifying expected existing program when attaching XDP

Alexei Starovoitov
2020-03-26T19:40:58Z

On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 10:13:23PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> >
> > Now for XDP. It has same flawed model. And even if it seems to you
> > that it's not a big issue, and even if Jakub thinks we are trying to
> > solve non-existing problem, it is a real problem and a real concern
> > from people that have to support XDP in production with many
>
> More than happy to talk to those folks, and see the tickets.

Jakub, you repeatedly demonstrated lack of understanding of what
bpf_link is despite multiple attempts from me, Andrii and others.
At this point I don't believe in your good intent.
Your repeated attacks on BPF in every thread are out of control.
I kept ignoring your insults for long time, but I cannot do this anymore.
Please find other threads to contribute your opinions.
They are not welcomed here.

> > well-meaning developers developing BPF applications independently.
>
> There is one single program which can be attached to the XDP hook,
> the "everybody attaches their program model" does not apply.
>
> TW agent should just listen on netlink notifications to see if someone
> replaced its program.

This is dumbest idea I've heard in a long time.
May be kernel shouldn't have done ACLs and did notifications only
when file is accessed by a task that shouldn't have accessed it?
Same level of craziness.