[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <C6DEFAAB-C77F-435C-A5ED-56F16BC5AF4D@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 11:06:43 +0200
From: "Eelco Chaudron" <echaudro@...hat.com>
To: "Yonghong Song" <yhs@...com>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, kafai@...com,
songliubraving@...com, andriin@...com, toke@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3] libbpf: fix probe code to return EPERM if
encountered
On 11 May 2020, at 22:43, Yonghong Song wrote:
> On 5/11/20 5:40 AM, Eelco Chaudron wrote:
>> When the probe code was failing for any reason ENOTSUP was returned,
>> even
>> if this was due to no having enough lock space. This patch fixes this
>> by
>> returning EPERM to the user application, so it can respond and
>> increase
>> the RLIMIT_MEMLOCK size.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eelco Chaudron <echaudro@...hat.com>
>> ---
>> v3: Updated error message to be more specific as suggested by Andrii
>> v2: Split bpf_object__probe_name() in two functions as suggested by
>> Andrii
>>
>> tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>> 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> index 8f480e29a6b0..ad3043c5db13 100644
>> --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.c
>> @@ -3149,7 +3149,7 @@ int bpf_map__resize(struct bpf_map *map, __u32
>> max_entries)
>> }
>> static int
>> -bpf_object__probe_name(struct bpf_object *obj)
>> +bpf_object__probe_loading(struct bpf_object *obj)
>> {
>> struct bpf_load_program_attr attr;
>> char *cp, errmsg[STRERR_BUFSIZE];
>> @@ -3170,14 +3170,34 @@ bpf_object__probe_name(struct bpf_object
>> *obj)
>> ret = bpf_load_program_xattr(&attr, NULL, 0);
>> if (ret < 0) {
>> cp = libbpf_strerror_r(errno, errmsg, sizeof(errmsg));
>> - pr_warn("Error in %s():%s(%d). Couldn't load basic 'r0 = 0' BPF
>> program.\n",
>> - __func__, cp, errno);
>> + pr_warn("Error in %s():%s(%d). Couldn't load trivial BPF "
>> + "program. Make sure your kernel supports BPF "
>> + "(CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL=y) and/or that RLIMIT_MEMLOCK is "
>> + "set to big enough value.\n", __func__, cp, errno);
>> return -errno;
>
> Just curious. Did "errno" always survive pr_warn() here? pr_warn() may
> call user supplied print function which it outside libbpf control.
> Maybe should cache errno before calling pr_warn()?
I guess this issue has always been there, however, I sent out a v4
fixing this case.
>> }
>> close(ret);
>> - /* now try the same program, but with the name */
>> + return 0;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static int
>> +bpf_object__probe_name(struct bpf_object *obj)
>> +{
>> + struct bpf_load_program_attr attr;
>> + struct bpf_insn insns[] = {
>> + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
>> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
>> + };
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + /* make sure loading with name works */
>> + memset(&attr, 0, sizeof(attr));
>> + attr.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER;
>> + attr.insns = insns;
>> + attr.insns_cnt = ARRAY_SIZE(insns);
>> + attr.license = "GPL";
>> attr.name = "test";
>> ret = bpf_load_program_xattr(&attr, NULL, 0);
>> if (ret >= 0) {
>> @@ -5386,7 +5406,8 @@ int bpf_object__load_xattr(struct
>> bpf_object_load_attr *attr)
>> obj->loaded = true;
>> - err = bpf_object__probe_caps(obj);
>> + err = bpf_object__probe_loading(obj);
>> + err = err ? : bpf_object__probe_caps(obj);
>> err = err ? : bpf_object__resolve_externs(obj, obj->kconfig);
>> err = err ? : bpf_object__sanitize_and_load_btf(obj);
>> err = err ? : bpf_object__sanitize_maps(obj);
>>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists