netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: implement bpf_link-based cgroup BPF program attachment

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: <20200320213316.GA2708166@mini-arch.hsd1.ca.comcast.net>
Date:   Fri, 20 Mar 2020 14:33:16 -0700
From:   Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com,
        daniel@...earbox.net, andrii.nakryiko@...il.com, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/6] bpf: implement bpf_link-based cgroup BPF
 program attachment

On 03/20, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> index 5d01c5c7e598..fad9f79bb8f1 100644
> --- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> +++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
> @@ -111,6 +111,7 @@ enum bpf_cmd {
>  	BPF_MAP_LOOKUP_AND_DELETE_BATCH,
>  	BPF_MAP_UPDATE_BATCH,
>  	BPF_MAP_DELETE_BATCH,
[..]
> +	BPF_LINK_CREATE,
Curious, why did you decide to add new command versus reusing existing
BPF_PROG_ATTACH/BPF_PROG_DETACH pair? Can we have a new flag like
BPF_F_NOT_OWNED that we can set when calling BPF_PROG_ATTACH to trigger
all these new bpf_link properties (like cgroup not holding an extra ref)?