netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/9] libbpf: generalize libbpf externs support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAEf4Bzazwb6kZHP_vD0yd_kgoxh9mbhV_x11c80YBuy=b6ZHpA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:12:56 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
Cc:     Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/9] libbpf: generalize libbpf externs support

On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 2:57 PM Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> Only two small places on this version, otherwise it looks good to me.
> I can offer my reviewed-by, if need. :)
>
> Thanks for the patch!
>
> Reviewed-by: Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
>
> On Fri, Jun 19, 2020 at 1:34 PM Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com> wrote:
> >
> > Switch existing Kconfig externs to be just one of few possible kinds of more
> > generic externs. This refactoring is in preparation for ksymbol extern
> > support, added in the follow up patch. There are no functional changes
> > intended.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
> > ---
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -2756,23 +2796,29 @@ static int cmp_externs(const void *_a, const void *_b)
>
> [...]
>
> > +
> > +       if (a->type == EXT_KCFG) {
> > +               /* descending order by alignment requirements */
> > +               if (a->kcfg.align != b->kcfg.align)
> > +                       return a->kcfg.align > b->kcfg.align ? -1 : 1;
> > +               /* ascending order by size, within same alignment class */
> > +               if (a->kcfg.sz != b->kcfg.sz)
> > +                       return a->kcfg.sz < b->kcfg.sz ? -1 : 1;
> > +               /* resolve ties by name */
> > +       }
> > +
> >         return strcmp(a->name, b->name);
> >  }
>
> I assume the comment /* resolve ties by name */ is intended to be
> close to strcmp?

yep

>
> > @@ -2818,22 +2864,39 @@ static int bpf_object__collect_externs(struct bpf_object *obj)
> >                 ext->name = btf__name_by_offset(obj->btf, t->name_off);
> >                 ext->sym_idx = i;
> >                 ext->is_weak = GELF_ST_BIND(sym.st_info) == STB_WEAK;
> > -               ext->sz = btf__resolve_size(obj->btf, t->type);
> > -               if (ext->sz <= 0) {
> > -                       pr_warn("failed to resolve size of extern '%s': %d\n",
> > -                               ext_name, ext->sz);
> > -                       return ext->sz;
> > -               }
> > -               ext->align = btf__align_of(obj->btf, t->type);
> > -               if (ext->align <= 0) {
> > -                       pr_warn("failed to determine alignment of extern '%s': %d\n",
> > -                               ext_name, ext->align);
> > -                       return -EINVAL;
> > -               }
> > -               ext->type = find_extern_type(obj->btf, t->type,
> > -                                            &ext->is_signed);
> > -               if (ext->type == EXT_UNKNOWN) {
> > -                       pr_warn("extern '%s' type is unsupported\n", ext_name);
> > +
> > +               ext->sec_btf_id = find_extern_sec_btf_id(obj->btf, ext->btf_id);
> > +               if (ext->btf_id <= 0) {
> > +                       pr_warn("failed to find BTF for extern '%s' [%d] section: %d\n",
> > +                               ext_name, ext->btf_id, ext->sec_btf_id);
> > +                       return ext->sec_btf_id;
> > +               }
>
> Did you mean "ext->sec_btf_id <= 0" rather than "ext->btf_id <= 0"?

yep, argh...