linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: Check link_create parameter for multi

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: <918395a6-122c-4fb0-9761-892b8020b95e@linux.dev>
Date: Tue, 1 Apr 2025 20:40:15 +0800
From: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@...ux.dev>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: song@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
 martin.lau@...ux.dev, eddyz87@...il.com, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
 john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...ichev.me,
 haoluo@...gle.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, mhiramat@...nel.org,
 mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, laoar.shao@...il.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: Check link_create parameter for
 multi_uprobe

在 2025/4/1 19:03, Jiri Olsa 写道:
> On Mon, Mar 31, 2025 at 05:47:45PM +0800, Tao Chen wrote:
>> The target_fd and flags in link_create no used in multi_uprobe
>> , return -EINVAL if they assigned, keep it same as other link
>> attach apis.
>>
>> Fixes: 89ae89f53d20 ("bpf: Add multi uprobe link")
>> Signed-off-by: Tao Chen <chen.dylane@...ux.dev>
>> ---
>>   kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 3 +++
>>   1 file changed, 3 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> index 2f206a2a2..f7ebf17e3 100644
>> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> @@ -3385,6 +3385,9 @@ int bpf_uprobe_multi_link_attach(const union bpf_attr *attr, struct bpf_prog *pr
>>   	if (sizeof(u64) != sizeof(void *))
>>   		return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>   
>> +	if (attr->link_create.target_fd || attr->link_create.flags)
>> +		return -EINVAL;
> 
> I think the CI is failing because usdt code does uprobe multi detection
> with target_fd = -1 and it fails and perf-uprobe fallback will fail on
> not having enough file descriptors
> 

Hi jiri

As you said, i found it, thanks.

static int probe_uprobe_multi_link(int token_fd)
{
         LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_prog_load_opts, load_opts,
                 .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI,
                 .token_fd = token_fd,
                 .prog_flags = token_fd ? BPF_F_TOKEN_FD : 0,
         );
         LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_link_create_opts, link_opts);
         struct bpf_insn insns[] = {
                 BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
                 BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
         };
         int prog_fd, link_fd, err;
         unsigned long offset = 0;

         prog_fd = bpf_prog_load(BPF_PROG_TYPE_KPROBE, NULL, "GPL",
                                 insns, ARRAY_SIZE(insns), &load_opts);
         if (prog_fd < 0)
                 return -errno;

         /* Creating uprobe in '/' binary should fail with -EBADF. */
         link_opts.uprobe_multi.path = "/";
         link_opts.uprobe_multi.offsets = &offset;
         link_opts.uprobe_multi.cnt = 1;

         link_fd = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, -1, BPF_TRACE_UPROBE_MULTI, 
&link_opts);

> but I think at this stage we will brake some user apps by introducing
> this check, link ebpf go library, which passes 0
> 

So is it ok just check the flags?

> jirka
> 
> 
>> +
>>   	if (!is_uprobe_multi(prog))
>>   		return -EINVAL;
>>   
>> -- 
>> 2.43.0
>>


-- 
Best Regards
Tao Chen