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  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:   Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:58:37 +0100
From:   Johannes Berg <>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <>
Cc:     Florian Westphal <>, Ido Schimmel <>,
        Aleksandr Nogikh <>,,,,,,,,,,
        Aleksandr Nogikh <>,
        Willem de Bruijn <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 12:55 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> [snip]
> Ack, you have to figure out all the places anyway, the question is
> whether you put probes there or calls in the source code.
> Shifting the maintenance burden but also BPF is flexibility.

Yeah, true. Though I'd argue also visibility - this stuff is pretty
simple now, if it gets into lots of lines of BPF code to track it that
is maintained "elsewhere", we won't see the bugs in it :-)

And it's kinda a thing that we as kernel developers _should_ be the ones
looking at since it's testing our code.

> Yup, the point is you can feed a raw skb pointer (and all other
> possible context you may want) to a BPF prog in kcov_remote_start() 
> and let BPF/BTF give you the handle it recorded in its maps.

Yeah, it's possible. Personally, I don't think it's worth the

> It is more complicated. We can go back to an skb field if this work is
> expected to yield results for mac80211. Would you mind sending a patch?

I can do that, but I'm not going to be able to do it now/tonight (GMT+1
here), so probably only Monday/Tuesday or so, sorry.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists