netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Extend the sk_lookup() helper to XDP hookpoint.

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: <CAOftzPjyeD2-nGW+NPC4sbxLcQY_CFT5HikXYeKUEWCbRcrpQg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Oct 2018 09:47:49 -0700
From:   Joe Stringer <joe@...d.net.nz>
To:     Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc:     Joe Stringer <joe@...d.net.nz>, daniel@...earbox.net,
        Nitin Hande <nitin.hande@...il.com>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, ast@...nel.org,
        Jesper Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        john fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Extend the sk_lookup() helper to XDP hookpoint.

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 at 22:07, Martin Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 18, 2018 at 04:52:40PM -0700, Joe Stringer wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 at 14:20, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/18/2018 11:06 PM, Joe Stringer wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 at 11:54, Nitin Hande <nitin.hande@...il.com> wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > >> Open Issue
> > > >> * The underlying code relies on presence of an skb to find out the
> > > >> right sk for the case of REUSEPORT socket option. Since there is
> > > >> no skb available at XDP hookpoint, the helper function will return
> > > >> the first available sk based off the 5 tuple hash. If the desire
> > > >> is to return a particular sk matching reuseport_cb function, please
> > > >> suggest way to tackle it, which can be addressed in a future commit.
> > >
> > > >> Signed-off-by: Nitin Hande <Nitin.Hande@...il.com>
> > > >
> > > > Thanks Nitin, LGTM overall.
> > > >
> > > > The REUSEPORT thing suggests that the usage of this helper from XDP
> > > > layer may lead to a different socket being selected vs. the equivalent
> > > > call at TC hook, or other places where the selection may occur. This
> > > > could be a bit counter-intuitive.
> > > >
> > > > One thought I had to work around this was to introduce a flag,
> > > > something like BPF_F_FIND_REUSEPORT_SK_BY_HASH. This flag would
> > > > effectively communicate in the API that the bpf_sk_lookup_xxx()
> > > > functions will only select a REUSEPORT socket based on the hash and
> > > > not by, for example BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_REUSEPORT programs. The absence
> > > > of the flag would support finding REUSEPORT sockets by other
> > > > mechanisms (which would be allowed for now from TC hooks but would be
> > > > disallowed from XDP, since there's no specific plan to support this).
> > >
> > > Hmm, given skb is NULL here the only way to lookup the socket in such
> > > scenario is based on hash, that is, inet_ehashfn() / inet6_ehashfn(),
> > > perhaps alternative is to pass this hash in from XDP itself to the
> > > helper so it could be custom selector. Do you have a specific use case
> > > on this for XDP (just curious)?
> >
> > I don't have a use case for SO_REUSEPORT introspection from XDP, so
> > I'm primarily thinking from the perspective of making the behaviour
> > clear in the API in a way that leaves open the possibility for a
> > reasonable implementation in future. From that perspective, my main
> > concern is that it may surprise some BPF writers that the same
> > "bpf_sk_lookup_tcp()" call (with identical parameters) may have
> > different behaviour at TC vs. XDP layers, as the BPF selection of
> > sockets is respected at TC but not at XDP.
> >
> > FWIW we're already out of parameters for the actual call, so if we
> > wanted to allow passing a hash in, we'd need to either dedicate half
> > the 'flags' field for this configurable hash, or consider adding the
> > new hash parameter to 'struct bpf_sock_tuple'.
> >
> > +Martin for any thoughts on SO_REUSEPORT and XDP here.
> The XDP/TC prog has read access to the sk fields through
> 'struct bpf_sock'?
>
> A quick thought...
> Considering all sk in the same reuse->socks[] share
> many things (e.g. family,type,protocol,ip,port..etc are the same),
> I wonder returning which particular sk from reuse->socks[] will
> matter too much since most of the fields from 'struct bpf_sock' will
> be the same.  Some of fields in 'struct bpf_sock' could be different
> though, like priority?  Hence, another possibility is to limit the
> accessible fields for the XDP prog.  Only allow accessing the fields
> that must be the same among the sk in the same reuse->socks[].

This sounds pretty reasonable to me.