netdev - Re: [RFC bpf-next 0/5] Convert iproute2 to use libbpf (WIP)

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:   Mon, 3 Feb 2020 21:00:37 -0800
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc:     Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next 0/5] Convert iproute2 to use libbpf (WIP)

On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 8:53 PM David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/3/20 8:41 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 5:46 PM David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2/3/20 5:56 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> >>> Great! Just to disambiguate and make sure we are in agreement, my hope
> >>> here is that iproute2 can completely delegate to libbpf all the ELF
> >>>
> >>
> >> iproute2 needs to compile and continue working as is when libbpf is not
> >> available. e.g., add check in configure to define HAVE_LIBBPF and move
> >> the existing code and move under else branch.
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to statically compile against libbpf in this
> > case and get rid a lot of BPF-related code and simplify the rest of
> > it? This can be easily done by using libbpf through submodule, the
> > same way as BCC and pahole do it.
> >
>
> iproute2 compiles today and runs on older distributions and older
> distributions with newer kernels. That needs to hold true after the move
> to libbpf.

And by statically compiling against libbpf, checked out as a
submodule, that will still hold true, wouldn't it? Or there is some
complications I'm missing? Libbpf is designed to handle old kernels
with no problems.