netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next 0/7] net: flow_dissector: trigger BPF hook when called from eth_get

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: <20190206031215.qldeh7pfgqr3frg3@ast-mbp>
Date:   Tue, 5 Feb 2019 19:12:16 -0800
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
Cc:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        simon.horman@...ronome.com, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next 0/7] net: flow_dissector: trigger BPF hook when
 called from eth_get_headlen

On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 04:59:31PM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 02/05, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 05, 2019 at 12:40:03PM -0800, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > On 02/05, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Feb 5, 2019 at 12:57 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Currently, when eth_get_headlen calls flow dissector, it doesn't pass any
> > > > > skb. Because we use passed skb to lookup associated networking namespace
> > > > > to find whether we have a BPF program attached or not, we always use
> > > > > C-based flow dissector in this case.
> > > > >
> > > > > The goal of this patch series is to add new networking namespace argument
> > > > > to the eth_get_headlen and make BPF flow dissector programs be able to
> > > > > work in the skb-less case.
> > > > >
> > > > > The series goes like this:
> > > > > 1. introduce __init_skb and __init_skb_shinfo; those will be used to
> > > > >    initialize temporary skb
> > > > > 2. introduce skb_net which can be used to get networking namespace
> > > > >    associated with an skb
> > > > > 3. add new optional network namespace argument to __skb_flow_dissect and
> > > > >    plumb through the callers
> > > > > 4. add new __flow_bpf_dissect which constructs temporary on-stack skb
> > > > >    (using __init_skb) and calls BPF flow dissector program
> > > > 
> > > > The main concern I see with this series is this cost of skb zeroing
> > > > for every packet in the device driver receive routine, *independent*
> > > > from the real skb allocation and zeroing which will likely happen
> > > > later.
> > > Yes, plus ~200 bytes on the stack for the callers.
> > > 
> > > Not sure how visible this zeroing though, I can probably try to get some
> > > numbers from BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN (running current version vs running with
> > > on-stack skb).
> > 
> > imo extra 256 byte memset for every packet is non starter.
> We can put pre-allocated/initialized skbs without data into percpu or even
> use pcpu_freelist_pop/pcpu_freelist_push to make sure we don't have to think
> about having multiple percpu for irq/softirq/process contexts.
> Any concerns with that approach?
> Any other possible concerns with the overall series?

I'm missing why the whole thing is needed.
You're saying:
" make BPF flow dissector programs be able to work in the skb-less case".
What does it mean specifically?
The only non-skb case is XDP.
Are you saying you want flow_dissector prog to be run in XDP?