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: <87y31qepu6.fsf@toke.dk>
Date:   Mon, 24 Jun 2019 21:38:25 +0200
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc:     Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v5 0/3] xdp: Allow lookup into devmaps before redirect

Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> writes:

> On Sat, Jun 22, 2019 at 7:19 PM Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com> wrote:
>>
>> When using the bpf_redirect_map() helper to redirect packets from XDP, the eBPF
>> program cannot currently know whether the redirect will succeed, which makes it
>> impossible to gracefully handle errors. To properly fix this will probably
>> require deeper changes to the way TX resources are allocated, but one thing that
>> is fairly straight forward to fix is to allow lookups into devmaps, so programs
>> can at least know when a redirect is *guaranteed* to fail because there is no
>> entry in the map. Currently, programs work around this by keeping a shadow map
>> of another type which indicates whether a map index is valid.
>>
>> This series contains two changes that are complementary ways to fix this issue:
>>
>> - Moving the map lookup into the bpf_redirect_map() helper (and caching the
>>   result), so the helper can return an error if no value is found in the map.
>>   This includes a refactoring of the devmap and cpumap code to not care about
>>   the index on enqueue.
>>
>> - Allowing regular lookups into devmaps from eBPF programs, using the read-only
>>   flag to make sure they don't change the values.
>>
>> The performance impact of the series is negligible, in the sense that I cannot
>> measure it because the variance between test runs is higher than the difference
>> pre/post series.
>>
>> Changelog:
>>
>> v5:
>>   - Rebase on latest bpf-next.
>>   - Update documentation for bpf_redirect_map() with the new meaning of flags.
>>
>> v4:
>>   - Fix a few nits from Andrii
>>   - Lose the #defines in bpf.h and just compare the flags argument directly to
>>     XDP_TX in bpf_xdp_redirect_map().
>>
>> v3:
>>   - Adopt Jonathan's idea of using the lower two bits of the flag value as the
>>     return code.
>>   - Always do the lookup, and cache the result for use in xdp_do_redirect(); to
>>     achieve this, refactor the devmap and cpumap code to get rid the bitmap for
>>     selecting which devices to flush.
>>
>> v2:
>>   - For patch 1, make it clear that the change works for any map type.
>>   - For patch 2, just use the new BPF_F_RDONLY_PROG flag to make the return
>>     value read-only.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Toke Høiland-Jørgensen (3):
>>       devmap/cpumap: Use flush list instead of bitmap
>>       bpf_xdp_redirect_map: Perform map lookup in eBPF helper
>>       devmap: Allow map lookups from eBPF
>>
>>
>>  include/linux/filter.h   |    1
>>  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |    7 ++-
>>  kernel/bpf/cpumap.c      |  106 ++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
>>  kernel/bpf/devmap.c      |  113 ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
>>  kernel/bpf/verifier.c    |    7 +--
>>  net/core/filter.c        |   29 +++++-------
>>  6 files changed, 123 insertions(+), 140 deletions(-)
>>
>
>
> Looks like you forgot to add my Acked-by's for your patches?

Ah yes, did not carry those forward for the individual patches, my
apologies. Could you perhaps be persuaded to send a new one (I believe a
response to the cover letter acking the whole series would suffice)?
I'll make sure to add the carrying forward of acks into my workflow in
the future :)

-Toke

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ