linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 5/9] bpf: syscall: add percpu version of lookup/update elem

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 linux-cve-announce 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:	Wed, 13 Jan 2016 22:56:38 +0800
From:	Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/9] bpf: syscall: add percpu version of lookup/update elem

On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 1:30 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:17:23AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:22 AM, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 08:38:18AM +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
>> >> > The userspace usually only aggregates value across all cpu every X seconds.
>> >>
>> >> That is just in your case, and Alexei worried the issue of data stale.
>> > I believe we are talking about validity of a value.  How to
>> > make use of a less-stale but invalid data?
>>
>> About the 'invalidity' thing, it should be same between using
>> smp_call(run in IPI irq handler) and simple memcpy().
>>
>> When smp_call_function_single() is used to request to lookup element in
>> the specific CPU, the value of the element may be in updating in that CPU
>> and not completed yet in eBPF prog, then IPI comes and half updated
>> data is still returned to syscall.
>
> hmm. I'm not following. bpf programs are executing with preempt disabled,
> so smp_call_function_single suppose to execute when bpf is not running.

Preempt disabled doesn't mean irq disabled, does it?  So when bpf prog is
running, the IPI irq for smp_call still may come on that CPU.

Also in current non-percpu hash, the situation exists too between
lookup elem syscall and updating value of element from bpf prog in
SMP.

-- 
Ming Lei