netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/8] libbpf: implement bpf_prog_find

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: <20200902210838.7a26mfi54dufou5a@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Wed, 2 Sep 2020 14:08:38 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
Cc:     sdf@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        YiFei Zhu <zhuyifei1999@...il.com>, andriin@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 4/8] libbpf: implement bpf_prog_find_metadata

On Wed, Sep 02, 2020 at 11:43:26AM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> >
> > I don't feel great about this libbpf api. bpftool already does
> > bpf_obj_get_info_by_fd() for progs and for maps.
> > This extra step and extra set of syscalls is redundant work.
> > I think it's better to be done as part of bpftool.
> > It doesn't quite fit as generic api.
> 
> Why not? 

It's a helper function on top of already provided api and implemented
in the most brute force and inefficient way.
bpftool implementation of the same will be more efficient.

> so. If we don't have it, people will have to go look at bpftool code,
> and we'll end up with copied code snippets, which seems less than ideal.

I'd like to see the real use case first before hypothesising.