[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <34A3894D-C928-4332-BD82-9B7C1459A8D1@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2019 18:49:21 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 bpf-next 15/18] bpf: Support attaching tracing BPF
program to other BPF programs
> On Nov 7, 2019, at 10:40 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Allow FENTRY/FEXIT BPF programs to attach to other BPF programs of any type
> including their subprograms. This feature allows snooping on input and output
> packets in XDP, TC programs including their return values. In order to do that
> the verifier needs to track types not only of vmlinux, but types of other BPF
> programs as well. The verifier also needs to translate uapi/linux/bpf.h types
> used by networking programs into kernel internal BTF types used by FENTRY/FEXIT
> BPF programs. In some cases LLVM optimizations can remove arguments from BPF
> subprograms without adjusting BTF info that LLVM backend knows. When BTF info
> disagrees with actual types that the verifiers sees the BPF trampoline has to
> fallback to conservative and treat all arguments as u64. The FENTRY/FEXIT
> program can still attach to such subprograms, but won't be able to recognize
> pointer types like 'struct sk_buff *' into won't be able to pass them to
^^^^^ these few words are confusing
> bpf_skb_output() for dumping to user space.
>
> The BPF_PROG_LOAD command is extended with attach_prog_fd field. When it's set
> to zero the attach_btf_id is one vmlinux BTF type ids. When attach_prog_fd
> points to previously loaded BPF program the attach_btf_id is BTF type id of
> main function or one of its subprograms.
>
> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
>
[...]
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> index cd9a9395c4b5..f385c4043594 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
> @@ -9390,13 +9390,17 @@ static void print_verification_stats(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> static int check_attach_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> {
> struct bpf_prog *prog = env->prog;
> + struct bpf_prog *tgt_prog = prog->aux->linked_prog;
> u32 btf_id = prog->aux->attach_btf_id;
> const char prefix[] = "btf_trace_";
> struct bpf_trampoline *tr;
> const struct btf_type *t;
> + int ret, subprog = -1, i;
> + bool conservative = true;
> const char *tname;
> + struct btf *btf;
> long addr;
> - int ret;
> + u64 key;
>
> if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING)
> return 0;
> @@ -9405,19 +9409,42 @@ static int check_attach_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
> verbose(env, "Tracing programs must provide btf_id\n");
> return -EINVAL;
> }
> - t = btf_type_by_id(btf_vmlinux, btf_id);
> + btf = bpf_prog_get_target_btf(prog);
btf could be NULL here, so we need to check it?
[...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists