netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 17/26] tracing: allow eBPF programs to be attached to events

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 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, 15 Aug 2014 10:20:25 -0700
From:	Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
To:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>
Cc:	Brendan Gregg <brendan.d.gregg@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	Chema Gonzalez <chema@...gle.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
	Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v4 net-next 17/26] tracing: allow eBPF programs to be
 attached to events

On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 11:08 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 2:20 PM, Brendan Gregg
> <brendan.d.gregg@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com> wrote:
>> [...]
>>> +/* For tracing filters save first six arguments of tracepoint events.
>>> + * On 64-bit architectures argN fields will match one to one to arguments passed
>>> + * to tracepoint events.
>>> + * On 32-bit architectures u64 arguments to events will be seen into two
>>> + * consecutive argN, argN+1 fields. Pointers, u32, u16, u8, bool types will
>>> + * match one to one
>>> + */
>>> +struct bpf_context {
>>> +       unsigned long arg1;
>>> +       unsigned long arg2;
>>> +       unsigned long arg3;
>>> +       unsigned long arg4;
>>> +       unsigned long arg5;
>>> +       unsigned long arg6;
>>> +       unsigned long ret;
>>> +};
>>
>> While this works, the argN+1 shift for 32-bit is a gotcha to learn.
>> Lets say arg1 was 64-bit, and my program only examined arg2. I'd need
>> two programs, one for 64-bit (using arg2) and 32-bit (arg3). If there
>
> correct.
> I've picked 'long' type for these tracepoint 'arguments' to match
> what is going on at assembler level.
> 32-bit archs are passing 64-bit values in two consecutive registers
> or two stack slots. So it's partially exposing architectural details.
> I've tried to use u64 here, but it complicated tracepoint+ebpf patch
> a lot, since I need per-architecture support for moving C arguments
> into u64 variables and hacking tracepoint event definitions in a nasty
> ways. This 'long' type approach is the least intrusive I could find.
> Also out of 1842 total tracepoint fields, only 144 fields are 64-bit,
> so rarely one would need to deal with u64. Most of the tracepoint
> arguments are either longs, ints or pointers, which fits this approach
> the best.
> In general the eBPF design approach is to keep kernel bits as simple
> as possible and move complexity to user space.
> In this case some higher language than C for writing scripts can
> hide this oddity.

The downside of this approach is that compat support might be
difficult or impossible.

--Andy

-- 
Andy Lutomirski
AMA Capital Management, LLC
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html