linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: Add bpf_map__set

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAKH8qBs7FHAT9ZW+xAfJ=3gr8ZhZ7fMQO6K2Cmw8FuKGa7+GPQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Jul 2022 16:01:55 -0700
From:   Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
To:     Joe Burton <jevburton@...gle.com>
Cc:     Joe Burton <jevburton.kernel@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
        Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] libbpf: Add bpf_map__set_name()

On Wed, Jul 13, 2022 at 3:32 PM Joe Burton <jevburton@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > Asked you internally, but not sure I follow. Can you share more on why
> > the following won't fix it for us:
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/OSZP286MB1725CEA1C95C5CB8E7CCC53FB8869@OSZP286MB1725.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM/
> >
> > ?
> >
> > The idea seems to be to get the supplied map name (from the obj)
> > instead of using pin name? So why is it not enough?
>
> You're correct, this approach also resolves the issue. No need for this
> new API.

SG! New helper might still be useful, but I'm not sure how safe that
is, given how much we use the name internally in libbpf
(name/pin_path). So it might be safer to use Anquan's approach for
now.

Andrii, any concerns with [1] ? Should we pull that in?

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/OSZP286MB1725CEA1C95C5CB8E7CCC53FB8869@OSZP286MB1725.JPNP286.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM/