| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20200309111243.6982-4-lmb@cloudflare.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2020 11:12:34 +0000
From: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>,
Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc: kernel-team@...udflare.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 03/12] bpf: tcp: move assertions into tcp_bpf_get_proto
We need to ensure that sk->sk_prot uses certain callbacks, so that
code that directly calls e.g. tcp_sendmsg in certain corner cases
works. To avoid spurious asserts, we must to do this only if
sk_psock_update_proto has not yet been called. The same invariants
apply for tcp_bpf_check_v6_needs_rebuild, so move the call as well.
Doing so allows us to merge tcp_bpf_init and tcp_bpf_reinit.
Signed-off-by: Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>
Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Acked-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
---
include/net/tcp.h | 1 -
net/core/sock_map.c | 25 +++++++++----------------
net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c | 42 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------------
3 files changed, 31 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-)
diff --git a/include/net/tcp.h b/include/net/tcp.h
index 07f947cc80e6..ccf39d80b695 100644
--- a/include/net/tcp.h
+++ b/include/net/tcp.h
@@ -2196,7 +2196,6 @@ struct sk_msg;
struct sk_psock;
int tcp_bpf_init(struct sock *sk);
-void tcp_bpf_reinit(struct sock *sk);
int tcp_bpf_sendmsg_redir(struct sock *sk, struct sk_msg *msg, u32 bytes,
int flags);
int tcp_bpf_recvmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t len,
diff --git a/net/core/sock_map.c b/net/core/sock_map.c
index cb8f740f7949..fafcbd22ecba 100644
--- a/net/core/sock_map.c
+++ b/net/core/sock_map.c
@@ -145,8 +145,8 @@ static int sock_map_link(struct bpf_map *map, struct sk_psock_progs *progs,
struct sock *sk)
{
struct bpf_prog *msg_parser, *skb_parser, *skb_verdict;
- bool skb_progs, sk_psock_is_new = false;
struct sk_psock *psock;
+ bool skb_progs;
int ret;
skb_verdict = READ_ONCE(progs->skb_verdict);
@@ -191,18 +191,14 @@ static int sock_map_link(struct bpf_map *map, struct sk_psock_progs *progs,
ret = -ENOMEM;
goto out_progs;
}
- sk_psock_is_new = true;
}
if (msg_parser)
psock_set_prog(&psock->progs.msg_parser, msg_parser);
- if (sk_psock_is_new) {
- ret = tcp_bpf_init(sk);
- if (ret < 0)
- goto out_drop;
- } else {
- tcp_bpf_reinit(sk);
- }
+
+ ret = tcp_bpf_init(sk);
+ if (ret < 0)
+ goto out_drop;
write_lock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
if (skb_progs && !psock->parser.enabled) {
@@ -239,15 +235,12 @@ static int sock_map_link_no_progs(struct bpf_map *map, struct sock *sk)
if (IS_ERR(psock))
return PTR_ERR(psock);
- if (psock) {
- tcp_bpf_reinit(sk);
- return 0;
+ if (!psock) {
+ psock = sk_psock_init(sk, map->numa_node);
+ if (!psock)
+ return -ENOMEM;
}
- psock = sk_psock_init(sk, map->numa_node);
- if (!psock)
- return -ENOMEM;
-
ret = tcp_bpf_init(sk);
if (ret < 0)
sk_psock_put(sk, psock);
diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
index 3327afa05c3d..ed8a8f3c9afe 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c
@@ -629,14 +629,6 @@ static int __init tcp_bpf_v4_build_proto(void)
}
core_initcall(tcp_bpf_v4_build_proto);
-static void tcp_bpf_update_sk_prot(struct sock *sk, struct sk_psock *psock)
-{
- int family = sk->sk_family == AF_INET6 ? TCP_BPF_IPV6 : TCP_BPF_IPV4;
- int config = psock->progs.msg_parser ? TCP_BPF_TX : TCP_BPF_BASE;
-
- sk_psock_update_proto(sk, psock, &tcp_bpf_prots[family][config]);
-}
-
static int tcp_bpf_assert_proto_ops(struct proto *ops)
{
/* In order to avoid retpoline, we make assumptions when we call
@@ -648,34 +640,44 @@ static int tcp_bpf_assert_proto_ops(struct proto *ops)
ops->sendpage == tcp_sendpage ? 0 : -ENOTSUPP;
}
-void tcp_bpf_reinit(struct sock *sk)
+static struct proto *tcp_bpf_get_proto(struct sock *sk, struct sk_psock *psock)
{
- struct sk_psock *psock;
+ int family = sk->sk_family == AF_INET6 ? TCP_BPF_IPV6 : TCP_BPF_IPV4;
+ int config = psock->progs.msg_parser ? TCP_BPF_TX : TCP_BPF_BASE;
- sock_owned_by_me(sk);
+ if (!psock->sk_proto) {
+ struct proto *ops = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_prot);
- rcu_read_lock();
- psock = sk_psock(sk);
- tcp_bpf_update_sk_prot(sk, psock);
- rcu_read_unlock();
+ if (tcp_bpf_assert_proto_ops(ops))
+ return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
+
+ tcp_bpf_check_v6_needs_rebuild(sk, ops);
+ }
+
+ return &tcp_bpf_prots[family][config];
}
int tcp_bpf_init(struct sock *sk)
{
- struct proto *ops = READ_ONCE(sk->sk_prot);
struct sk_psock *psock;
+ struct proto *prot;
sock_owned_by_me(sk);
rcu_read_lock();
psock = sk_psock(sk);
- if (unlikely(!psock || psock->sk_proto ||
- tcp_bpf_assert_proto_ops(ops))) {
+ if (unlikely(!psock)) {
rcu_read_unlock();
return -EINVAL;
}
- tcp_bpf_check_v6_needs_rebuild(sk, ops);
- tcp_bpf_update_sk_prot(sk, psock);
+
+ prot = tcp_bpf_get_proto(sk, psock);
+ if (IS_ERR(prot)) {
+ rcu_read_unlock();
+ return PTR_ERR(prot);
+ }
+
+ sk_psock_update_proto(sk, psock, prot);
rcu_read_unlock();
return 0;
}
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists