[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20181012205428.GA32209@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2018 13:54:28 -0700
From: Joel Fernandes <joelaf@...gle.com>
To: Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, timmurray@...gle.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Lorenzo Colitti <lorenzo@...gle.com>,
Chenbo Feng <fengc@...gle.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, kernel-team@...roid.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Wait for running BPF programs when updating map-in-map
On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 03:54:27AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> The map-in-map frequently serves as a mechanism for atomic
> snapshotting of state that a BPF program might record. The current
> implementation is dangerous to use in this way, however, since
> userspace has no way of knowing when all programs that might have
> retrieved the "old" value of the map may have completed.
>
> This change ensures that map update operations on map-in-map map types
> always wait for all references to the old map to drop before returning
> to userspace.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Colascione <dancol@...gle.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> index 8339d81cba1d..d7c16ae1e85a 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
> @@ -741,6 +741,18 @@ static int map_lookup_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> return err;
> }
>
> +static void maybe_wait_bpf_programs(struct bpf_map *map)
> +{
> + /* Wait for any running BPF programs to complete so that
> + * userspace, when we return to it, knows that all programs
> + * that could be running use the new map value.
> + */
> + if (map->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH_OF_MAPS ||
> + map->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY_OF_MAPS) {
> + synchronize_rcu();
> + }
> +}
> +
> #define BPF_MAP_UPDATE_ELEM_LAST_FIELD flags
>
> static int map_update_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> @@ -831,6 +843,7 @@ static int map_update_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> }
> __this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
> preempt_enable();
> + maybe_wait_bpf_programs(map);
> out:
> free_value:
> kfree(value);
> @@ -883,6 +896,7 @@ static int map_delete_elem(union bpf_attr *attr)
> rcu_read_unlock();
> __this_cpu_dec(bpf_prog_active);
> preempt_enable();
> + maybe_wait_bpf_programs(map);
Looks good to me,
Reviewed-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@...lfernandes.org>
Also I believe that those rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() calls in the
existing code are useless. preempt_disable()d code is already an RCU
read-side section, and synchronize_rcu and friends work on those type of
read-side sections as well (as of recent kernel releases) however removing it
may make lockdep unhappy, unless we also replace all rcu_dereference() usages
with rcu_dereference_sched(), so lets leave that alone for now I guess.
thanks,
- Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists