linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/8] bpf: Implement task local storage

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]

Message-ID: <CACYkzJ79KVG6-W3ChGUC-AX8iU4Qt9gA=D2ht6UU+XThC5yJ2w@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 4 Nov 2020 00:54:46 +0100
From:   KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>
To:     Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
Cc:     open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Martin Lau <kafai@...com>, Paul Turner <pjt@...gle.com>,
        Jann Horn <jannh@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/8] bpf: Implement task local storage

On Wed, Nov 4, 2020 at 12:47 AM Song Liu <songliubraving@...com> wrote:
>
>
> > On Nov 3, 2020, at 7:31 AM, KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org> wrote:
> >
> > From: KP Singh <kpsingh@...gle.com>
> >
> > Similar to bpf_local_storage for sockets and inodes add local storage
> > for task_struct.
> >
> > The life-cycle of storage is managed with the life-cycle of the
> > task_struct.  i.e. the storage is destroyed along with the owning task
> > with a callback to the bpf_task_storage_free from the task_free LSM
> > hook.
> >
> > The BPF LSM allocates an __rcu pointer to the bpf_local_storage in
> > the security blob which are now stackable and can co-exist with other
> > LSMs.
> >
> > The userspace map operations can be done by using a pid fd as a key
> > passed to the lookup, update and delete operations.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@...gle.com>
>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
>
> with a few nits:
>
> > ---
> > include/linux/bpf_lsm.h        |  23 +++
> > include/linux/bpf_types.h      |   1 +
> > include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       |  39 ++++
> > kernel/bpf/Makefile            |   1 +
> > kernel/bpf/bpf_lsm.c           |   4 +
> > kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c  | 313 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > kernel/bpf/syscall.c           |   3 +-
> > kernel/bpf/verifier.c          |  10 ++
> > security/bpf/hooks.c           |   2 +
> > tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |  39 ++++
> > 10 files changed, 434 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > create mode 100644 kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c
> >
> > diff --git a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> > index aaacb6aafc87..326cb68a3632 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/bpf_lsm.h
> > @@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
> > #ifndef _LINUX_BPF_LSM_H
> > #define _LINUX_BPF_LSM_H
> >
> > +#include "linux/sched.h"
>
> vscode?

Yep, turns out it was clangd (which I use in vscode) and I needed to
pass "--header-insertion=never"
when starting the clangd server, I fixed all other instances as well.

- KP