lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Tue, 16 Sep 2014 14:23:27 -0700
From:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	Chema Gonzalez <chema@...gle.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 net-next 03/11] bpf: add lookup/update/delete/iterate
 methods to BPF maps

On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 1:54 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>
> The cost of the compat layer must be considered and weighted
> against this cast, which I think is really no big deal.
>
>> I think compat layer is a better option.
>
> It's overhead you'll have to support forever, I think you should
> reconsider.
>
> All of the "ugly casting" will be hidden, or can be hidden, in the
> syscall wrappers and/or interfaces in userspace.

ahh, ok. I thought you're strongly against any type of casts.
In such case I can get rid of 'union bpf_attr' as well and simply
define a struct per command, then syscall will look like:
sys_bpf(int cmd, void __user *attr, unsigned int size);
and uapi/linux/bpf.h will have:
struct bpf_prog_load_attr { /* for BPF_PROG_LOAD cmd */
    __u32 prog_type;
    __u32 insn_cnt;
    __aligned_u64 insns;
    __aligned_u64 license;
    __u32 log_level;
    __u32 log_size;
    __aligned_u64 log_buf;
};
and similar for other commands.
no compat layer and type checking will be done
by syscall wrappers. Ok?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists