From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-ua1-f50.google.com (mail-ua1-f50.google.com [209.85.222.50]) (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 B861D17C79; Wed, 5 Feb 2025 15:22:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.50 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738768929; cv=none; b=c1nT6d+WmIpNnzv2p11/CqUR6zun/dN5gcUD9yvVbcAx6ucqoh2ldiKXo2q21MMwu1bUlpWFE7YZu3BYWWrxCCEJuIAwCiRzdCZyA0WP5uCFsLYjf4P1FjWIRCW7lcr1OxzmakGvY8zwYXyT906wtQsKR7cYW7iYWQZVMoFY3O4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738768929; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0Msz/rSJUYCKfabmGezpBc/npBw0LDfEK+TxnozhQ7s=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:Subject: Mime-Version:Content-Type; b=oTh6hY7VKPF6PJCGVdOoCPNVVBVPPs++qc79nTEqJYuq6+NYZ84PxHDANSYlrOn+ROBPfkcg40DZQWg9nYrOT6sNxi7us1PBaYT2wXgfj6JgKk7iQg8V+15Lt9I3PPbWwCYP3X+tMGBZdsoAfIr1AIQYUkp1a3jfpYLTnUOSh+g= 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=mRuijMbo; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.222.50 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="mRuijMbo" Received: by mail-ua1-f50.google.com with SMTP id a1e0cc1a2514c-866e5a0303dso405448241.1; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 07:22:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1738768926; x=1739373726; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=hZaTXNgiQ+0ml21hW9Pw+HKxlz7vgH5W2AJovcqheVg=; b=mRuijMbo7PVHBKaGlQY+lqBb7N0YfGQIaS1dLwK+XcEa7m4z26EOpn3snueRpyOwKP n2DpQTaowYFe05qSMxLf7MVcT1qJaUaFZB03flGmO2d+lIsGSbhq1E91S/03SeW4AN9O 075SnaIuYwb82GhmDVO+jOd5NBZnXcbJVN80h2ewvs+/5VYXVjR4HivlhrXT8AysjfOv ik4PBDPqT59lYyJbSaugmrFsY9Wv5kEuWb1JnmdKpovSbIv86OLNAmCTWesPKu0PJ0E6 XOCm1etO4jv92y2890dCWVf+7QsEkmVlRHjbGRymlZvM5eFFQehUzsOQgaLmw5JRrMW/ v5yQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738768926; x=1739373726; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=hZaTXNgiQ+0ml21hW9Pw+HKxlz7vgH5W2AJovcqheVg=; b=ED/ZWK2PYNTiLUW+TKqwx9QPPWPxW//vhP0DvKK+TEPcY5TT6ar2nzfQS+FZ2wA74l RvVOBJlgotqUz0Cf/46diwRNoeY5cEznzVW5+7swOlV5GCwGFMFlnsRPQliUAI22i8Ew KhL5NF58SCHaykG0vN2SOymZNysDxCWI5SXO0yqjmEt9H75qF+4bA4a7JMDsOeJWbzkK L19r4ItRJ4DtgkynSLAXEFnVd24LjRJw/gY3Dc19zYED6Ll8U0nvsvHo/AgPQHn4AO5V PTYrgaEOP0rHmLvmeudvRUVbmpEn4u14XD29COC89hsfKk0bqkv8YtDEHJusRTYtxIdJ DZng== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVzRXY5IL2yHkahzoRVIXwL0veKfjJbt5a0itPlMfhaRochHkHMSJb29D8drrdCh/O5CpT6NRI=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy2KlZHU9gCTiwjnlILVRedIIFIm4gForL2H2jHmUT65Fo68P9U zIRZSeZ8xmSIu3rIhE+xW1AhL0cSrylPq2Z9ZZ9M/PT7fXClOmM6 X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctMiTVyx3bZKyRtBgG+r4rU+qFMzefL8o1qEgiVS9Z+VYVoJsYU3osjMnxCO1e qJYUIx6AYT8pcilAY8ho+jRDsPvwMjXMBQELjvbm/KIykkX4GZ/IMnpYwXNhSF1IMfT4um5Mu1M Rue6oiLWkwmV2PGh7zU68IombYFIfDfBv87ChHJYF3f8TiwE8nGFmhYe09cTwIVvJphegLIeOVv JrCYWAXq7nHGxAeSbKvKveqQ90BB+0/EQDsCz64t0z5xx4gr8Kl0Vg1pFLjLTs5CbjbzCyF+4Es w50ie9wgwD0D28yU4XBe9cUzMBpaJ9TpADZusLPKvaI+nVkX0LfNt27hQg6KBYc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG0+ibnrSKmHAO0dURI3gtdZMYOEeYv/DIr0c6F3Yg/OXIHEXbsSB/IAHUS0JQjR6ROOASTbA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6102:3c8e:b0:4b2:ae3a:35d6 with SMTP id ada2fe7eead31-4ba47a716f6mr2508104137.19.1738768926334; Wed, 05 Feb 2025 07:22:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (15.60.86.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.86.60.15]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id ada2fe7eead31-4b9bad168c0sm2348989137.26.2025.02.05.07.22.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 05 Feb 2025 07:22:05 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 05 Feb 2025 10:22:05 -0500 From: Willem de Bruijn To: Jason Xing , davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, dsahern@kernel.org, willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com, willemb@google.com, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, horms@kernel.org Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing Message-ID: <67a3821d3ae5b_14e0832944c@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <20250204183024.87508-2-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> References: <20250204183024.87508-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> <20250204183024.87508-2-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v8 01/12] bpf: add support for bpf_setsockopt() Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jason Xing wrote: > Users can write the following code to enable the bpf extension: > int flags = SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING; > int opts = SK_BPF_CB_FLAGS; > bpf_setsockopt(skops, SOL_SOCKET, opts, &flags, sizeof(flags)); > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing > --- > include/net/sock.h | 3 +++ > include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 8 ++++++++ > net/core/filter.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 1 + > 4 files changed, 35 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h > index 8036b3b79cd8..7916982343c6 100644 > --- a/include/net/sock.h > +++ b/include/net/sock.h > @@ -303,6 +303,7 @@ struct sk_filter; > * @sk_stamp: time stamp of last packet received > * @sk_stamp_seq: lock for accessing sk_stamp on 32 bit architectures only > * @sk_tsflags: SO_TIMESTAMPING flags > + * @sk_bpf_cb_flags: used in bpf_setsockopt() > * @sk_use_task_frag: allow sk_page_frag() to use current->task_frag. > * Sockets that can be used under memory reclaim should > * set this to false. > @@ -445,6 +446,8 @@ struct sock { > u32 sk_reserved_mem; > int sk_forward_alloc; > u32 sk_tsflags; > +#define SK_BPF_CB_FLAG_TEST(SK, FLAG) ((SK)->sk_bpf_cb_flags & (FLAG)) > + u32 sk_bpf_cb_flags; > __cacheline_group_end(sock_write_rxtx); > > __cacheline_group_begin(sock_write_tx); > diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > index 2acf9b336371..6116eb3d1515 100644 > --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > @@ -6913,6 +6913,13 @@ enum { > BPF_SOCK_OPS_ALL_CB_FLAGS = 0x7F, > }; > > +/* Definitions for bpf_sk_cb_flags */ > +enum { > + SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING = 1<<0, > + SK_BPF_CB_MASK = (SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING - 1) | > + SK_BPF_CB_TX_TIMESTAMPING > +}; > + > /* List of known BPF sock_ops operators. > * New entries can only be added at the end > */ > @@ -7091,6 +7098,7 @@ enum { > TCP_BPF_SYN_IP = 1006, /* Copy the IP[46] and TCP header */ > TCP_BPF_SYN_MAC = 1007, /* Copy the MAC, IP[46], and TCP header */ > TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS = 1008, /* Get or Set TCP sock ops flags */ > + SK_BPF_CB_FLAGS = 1009, /* Used to set socket bpf flags */ > }; > > enum { > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c > index 2ec162dd83c4..1c6c07507a78 100644 > --- a/net/core/filter.c > +++ b/net/core/filter.c > @@ -5222,6 +5222,25 @@ static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_get_socket_uid_proto = { > .arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_CTX, > }; > > +static int sk_bpf_set_get_cb_flags(struct sock *sk, char *optval, bool getopt) > +{ > + u32 sk_bpf_cb_flags; > + > + if (getopt) { > + *(u32 *)optval = sk->sk_bpf_cb_flags; > + return 0; > + } > + > + sk_bpf_cb_flags = *(u32 *)optval; > + > + if (sk_bpf_cb_flags & ~SK_BPF_CB_MASK) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + sk->sk_bpf_cb_flags = sk_bpf_cb_flags; I don't know BPF internals that well: Is there mutual exclusion between these sol_socket_sockopt calls? Or do these sk field accesses need WRITE_ONCE/READ_ONCE. > + > + return 0; > +} > + > static int sol_socket_sockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname, > char *optval, int *optlen, > bool getopt) > @@ -5238,6 +5257,7 @@ static int sol_socket_sockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname, > case SO_MAX_PACING_RATE: > case SO_BINDTOIFINDEX: > case SO_TXREHASH: > + case SK_BPF_CB_FLAGS: > if (*optlen != sizeof(int)) > return -EINVAL; > break; > @@ -5247,6 +5267,9 @@ static int sol_socket_sockopt(struct sock *sk, int optname, > return -EINVAL; > } > > + if (optname == SK_BPF_CB_FLAGS) > + return sk_bpf_set_get_cb_flags(sk, optval, getopt); > + > if (getopt) { > if (optname == SO_BINDTODEVICE) > return -EINVAL; > diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > index 2acf9b336371..70366f74ef4e 100644 > --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h > @@ -7091,6 +7091,7 @@ enum { > TCP_BPF_SYN_IP = 1006, /* Copy the IP[46] and TCP header */ > TCP_BPF_SYN_MAC = 1007, /* Copy the MAC, IP[46], and TCP header */ > TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS = 1008, /* Get or Set TCP sock ops flags */ > + SK_BPF_CB_FLAGS = 1009, /* Used to set socket bpf flags */ > }; > > enum { > -- > 2.43.5 >