netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] tools/bpftool: recognize bpf_prog

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]

Date:   Fri, 22 Feb 2019 20:17:40 -0800
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] tools/bpftool: recognize bpf_prog_info
 runtime and runcnt

On Fri, Feb 22, 2019 at 3:37 PM Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> $ bpftool p s
> 1: kprobe  tag a56587d488d216c9  gpl runtime 79786 runcnt 8
>         loaded_at 2019-02-22T12:22:51-0800  uid 0
>         xlated 352B  not jited  memlock 4096B
>
> $ bpftool --json --pretty p s
> [{
>         "id": 1,
>         "type": "kprobe",
>         "tag": "a56587d488d216c9",
>         "gpl_compatible": true,
>         "runtime": 79786,
>         "runcnt": 8,
>         "loaded_at": 1550866971,
>         "uid": 0,
>         "bytes_xlated": 352,
>         "jited": false,
>         "bytes_memlock": 4096
>     }
> ]
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> ---
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst | 4 +++-
>  tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c                         | 7 +++++++
>  2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst b/tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst
> index 12bc1e2d4b46..102b180d3add 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/Documentation/bpftool-prog.rst
> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ EXAMPLES
>
>  ::
>
> -    10: xdp  name some_prog  tag 005a3d2123620c8b  gpl
> +    10: xdp  name some_prog  tag 005a3d2123620c8b  gpl runtime 81632 runcnt 10
>              loaded_at 2017-09-29T20:11:00+0000  uid 0
>              xlated 528B  jited 370B  memlock 4096B  map_ids 10
>
> @@ -184,6 +184,8 @@ EXAMPLES
>              "type": "xdp",
>              "tag": "005a3d2123620c8b",
>              "gpl_compatible": true,
> +            "runtime": 81632,
> +            "runcnt": 10,

Should these fields be called "run_time" and "run_cnt" for consistency
with other fields? I'd even suggest "run_time_ns" so that there is no
question about time units.

>              "loaded_at": 1506715860,
>              "uid": 0,
>              "bytes_xlated": 528,
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> index db978c8d76a8..8065ba11b9d5 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/prog.c
> @@ -214,6 +214,10 @@ static void print_prog_json(struct bpf_prog_info *info, int fd)
>                      info->tag[4], info->tag[5], info->tag[6], info->tag[7]);
>
>         jsonw_bool_field(json_wtr, "gpl_compatible", info->gpl_compatible);
> +       if (info->runtime) {
> +               jsonw_uint_field(json_wtr, "runtime", info->runtime);
> +               jsonw_uint_field(json_wtr, "runcnt", info->runcnt);
> +       }
>
>         print_dev_json(info->ifindex, info->netns_dev, info->netns_ino);
>
> @@ -277,6 +281,9 @@ static void print_prog_plain(struct bpf_prog_info *info, int fd)
>         fprint_hex(stdout, info->tag, BPF_TAG_SIZE, "");
>         print_dev_plain(info->ifindex, info->netns_dev, info->netns_ino);
>         printf("%s", info->gpl_compatible ? "  gpl" : "");
> +       if (info->runtime)
> +               printf(" runtime %lld runcnt %lld",
> +                      info->runtime, info->runcnt);
>         printf("\n");
>
>         if (info->load_time) {
> --
> 2.20.0
>