[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180523.132648.459690706167609338.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2018 13:26:48 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: ast@...nel.org
Cc: daniel@...earbox.net, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, luto@...capital.net, mcgrof@...nel.org,
keescook@...omium.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/2] bpfilter
From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Date: Mon, 21 May 2018 19:22:28 -0700
> v2->v3:
> - followed Luis's suggestion and significantly simplied first patch
> with shmem_kernel_file_setup+kernel_write. Added kdoc for new helper
> - fixed typos and race to access pipes with mutex
> - tested with bpfilter being 'builtin'. CONFIG_BPFILTER_UMH=y|m both work.
> Interesting to see a usermode executable being embedded inside vmlinux.
> - it doesn't hurt to enable bpfilter in .config.
> ip_setsockopt commands sent to usermode via pipes and -ENOPROTOOPT is
> returned from userspace, so kernel falls back to original iptables code
>
> v1->v2:
> this patch set is almost a full rewrite of the earlier umh modules approach
> The v1 of patches and follow up discussion was covered by LWN:
> https://lwn.net/Articles/749108/
>
> I believe the v2 addresses all issues brought up by Andy and others.
> Mainly there are zero changes to kernel/module.c
> Instead of teaching module loading logic to recognize special
> umh module, let normal kernel modules execute part of its own
> .init.rodata as a new user space process (Andy's idea)
> Patch 1 introduces this new helper:
> int fork_usermode_blob(void *data, size_t len, struct umh_info *info);
> Input:
> data + len == executable file
> Output:
> struct umh_info {
> struct file *pipe_to_umh;
> struct file *pipe_from_umh;
> pid_t pid;
> };
Series applied, let the madness begin... :-)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists