linux-kernel - Re: [External] Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] bpf: make tracing program support multi-attach

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: <CALz3k9gM9Leuztxs9ZrM5YgwLXFQ4FMnBxHr6P=Q+GppPv5d=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 11:57:58 +0800
From: 梦龙董 <dongmenglong.8@...edance.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eddy Z <eddyz87@...il.com>, 
	Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, 
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, 
	Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, 
	Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com, 
	alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com, Kui-Feng Lee <thinker.li@...il.com>, 
	Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>, Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@...com>, 
	Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com, 
	linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [External] Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] bpf: make tracing program
 support multi-attach

On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 11:18 AM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:06 PM 梦龙董 <dongmenglong.8@...edance.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 11:02 AM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 6:45 PM 梦龙董 <dongmenglong.8@...edance.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 10:35 AM 梦龙董 <dongmenglong.8@...edance.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 9:24 AM Alexei Starovoitov
> > > > > <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 7:51 PM Menglong Dong
> > > > > > <dongmenglong.8@...edance.com> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For now, the BPF program of type BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING is not allowed to
> > > > > > > be attached to multiple hooks, and we have to create a BPF program for
> > > > > > > each kernel function, for which we want to trace, even through all the
> > > > > > > program have the same (or similar) logic. This can consume extra memory,
> > > > > > > and make the program loading slow if we have plenty of kernel function to
> > > > > > > trace.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Should this be combined with multi link ?
> > > > > > (As was recently done for kprobe_multi and uprobe_multi).
> > > > > > Loading fentry prog once and attaching it through many bpf_links
> > > > > > to multiple places is a nice addition,
> > > > > > but we should probably add a multi link right away too.
> > > > >
> > > > > I was planning to implement the multi link for tracing after this
> > > > > series in another series. I can do it together with this series
> > > > > if you prefer.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Should I introduce the multi link for tracing first, then this series?
> > > > (Furthermore, this series seems not necessary.)
> > >
> > > What do you mean "not necessary" ?
> > > Don't you want to still check that bpf prog access only N args
> > > and BTF for these args matches across all attach points ?
> >
> > No, I means that if we should keep the
> >
> > "Loading fentry prog once and attaching it through many bpf_links to
> > multiple places"
> >
> > and only keep the multi link.
>
> I suspect supporting multi link only is better,
> since the amount of kernel code to maintain will be less.

Okay!