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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <877divs5py.fsf@toke.dk>
Date:   Tue, 15 Jun 2021 13:54:49 +0200
From:   Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
Cc:     bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...dia.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Joe Stringer <joe@...ium.io>,
        Quentin Monnet <quentin@...valent.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC bpf-next 0/7] Add bpf_link based TC-BPF API

Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> writes:

>> > I offer two different views here:
>> >
>> > 1. If you view a TC filter as an instance as a netdev/qdisc/action, they
>> > are no different from this perspective. Maybe the fact that a TC filter
>> > resides in a qdisc makes a slight difference here, but like I mentioned, it
>> > actually makes sense to let TC filters be standalone, qdisc's just have to
>> > bind with them, like how we bind TC filters with standalone TC actions.
>>
>> You propose something different below IIUC, but I explained why I'm wary of
>> these unbound filters. They seem to add a step to classifier setup for no real
>> benefit to the user (except keeping track of one more object and cleaning it
>> up with the link when done).
>
> I am not even sure if unbound filters help your case at all, making
> them unbound merely changes their residence, not ownership.
> You are trying to pass the ownership from TC to bpf_link, which
> is what I am against.

So what do you propose instead?

bpf_link is solving a specific problem: ensuring automatic cleanup of
kernel resources held by a userspace application with a BPF component.
Not all applications work this way, but for the ones that do it's very
useful. But if the TC filter stays around after bpf_link detaches, that
kinda defeats the point of the automatic cleanup.

So I don't really see any way around transferring ownership somehow.
Unless you have some other idea that I'm missing?

-Toke

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ