linux-kernel - Re: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add testcase for bpf_task_under

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]

Date:   Fri, 5 May 2023 15:24:59 +0800
From:   Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
To:     Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
Cc:     martin.lau@...ux.dev, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        andrii@...nel.org, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
        jolsa@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, mykolal@...com,
        shuah@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, yangzhenze@...edance.com,
        wangdongdong.6@...edance.com
Subject: Re: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add testcase for
 bpf_task_under_cgroup

在 2023/5/5 15:13, Hao Luo 写道:
> On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 11:08 PM Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com> wrote:
>>
>> From: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
>>
>> test_progs:
>> Tests new kfunc bpf_task_under_cgroup().
>>
>> The bpf program saves the new task's pid within a given cgroup to
>> the remote_pid, which is convenient for the user-mode program to
>> verify the test correctness.
>>
>> The user-mode program creates its own mount namespace, and mounts the
>> cgroupsv2 hierarchy in there, call the fork syscall, then check if
>> remote_pid and local_pid are unequal.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
>> ---
> 
> Hi Feng,
> 
> I have a comment about the methodology of the test, but the patch
> looks ok to me. Why do we have to test via a tracing program? I think
> what we need is just a task and a cgroup. Since we have the kfunc
> bpf_task_from_pid() and bpf_cgroup_from_id(), we can write a syscall
> program which takes a pid and a cgroup id as input and get the task
> and cgroup objects directly in the program.
> 
> I like testing via a syscall program because it doesn't depend on the
> newtask tracepoint and it should be simpler. But I'm ok with the
> current version of the patch, just have some thoughts.
> 
> Hao

Yes, your method is also very good. The reason why I did this is because 
of Song's suggestion before, hope that the parameter of the hook point 
will have a task, so I chose this to test.