linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/22] rqspinlock: Add basic support for CONFIG

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: <745d8edc-d621-41a0-a18f-827989d55738@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2025 22:58:32 -0500
From: Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
 Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com>
Cc: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
 Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
 Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
 Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...nel.org>,
 Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, "Paul E. McKenney"
 <paulmck@...nel.org>, Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
 Barret Rhoden <brho@...gle.com>, Josh Don <joshdon@...gle.com>,
 Dohyun Kim <dohyunkim@...gle.com>, Kernel Team <kernel-team@...a.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 12/22] rqspinlock: Add basic support for
 CONFIG_PARAVIRT

On 1/8/25 10:53 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 8, 2025 at 7:46 PM Waiman Long <llong@...hat.com> wrote:
>>>>>> As for the locking semantics allowed by the BPF verifier, is it possible
>>>>>> to enforce the strict locking rules for PREEMPT_RT kernel and use the
>>>>>> relaxed semantics for non-PREEMPT_RT kernel. We don't want the loading
>>>>>> of an arbitrary BPF program to break the latency guarantee of a
>>>>>> PREEMPT_RT kernel.
>>>>> Not really.
>>>>> root can load silly bpf progs that take significant
>>>>> amount time without abusing spinlocks.
>>>>> Like 100k integer divides or a sequence of thousands of calls to map_update.
>>>>> Long runtime of broken progs is a known issue.
>>>>> We're working on a runtime termination check/watchdog that
>>>>> will detect long running progs and will terminate them.
>>>>> Safe termination is tricky, as you can imagine.
>>>> Right.
>>>>
>>>> In that case, we just have to warn users that they can load BPF prog at
>>>> their own risk and PREEMPT_RT kernel may break its latency guarantee.
>>> Let's not open this can of worms.
>>> There will be a proper watchdog eventually.
>>> If we start to warn, when do we warn? On any bpf program loaded?
>>> How about classic BPF ? tcpdump and seccomp ? They are limited
>>> to 4k instructions, but folks can abuse that too.
>> My intention is to document this somewhere, not to print out a warning
>> in the kernel dmesg log.
> Document what exactly?
> "Loading arbitrary BPF program may break the latency guarantee of PREEMPT_RT"
> ?
> That's not helpful to anyone.
> Especially it undermines the giant effort we did together
> with RT folks to make bpf behave well on RT.
> For a long time bpf was the only user of migrate_disable().
> Some of XDP bits got friendly to RT only in the last release. Etc.

OK, it is just a suggestion. If you don't think that is necessary, I am 
not going to insist. Anyway, users should thoroughly test their BPF 
program before deplolying on production systems.

Cheers,
Longman