netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] libbpf: Move CO-RE logic into separate file.

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: <CAEf4Bzakn6A=TAEE2C07JOxHZE8CA7xWMviJxoBZ3ZGMUgTBBg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Jul 2021 11:43:14 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] libbpf: Move CO-RE logic into separate file.

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 9:49 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2021 at 12:38 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Jul 20, 2021 at 5:08 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> > >
> > > Split CO-RE processing logic from libbpf into separate file
> > > with an interface that doesn't dependend on libbpf internal details.
> > > As the next step relo_core.c will be compiled with libbpf and with the kernel.
> > > The _internal_ interface between libbpf/CO-RE and kernel/CO-RE will be:
> > > int bpf_core_apply_relo_insn(const char *prog_name, struct bpf_insn *insn,
> > >                              int insn_idx,
> > >                              const struct bpf_core_relo *relo,
> > >                              int relo_idx,
> > >                              const struct btf *local_btf,
> > >                              struct bpf_core_cand_list *cands);
> > > where bpf_core_relo and bpf_core_cand_list are simple types
> > > prepared by kernel and libbpf.
> > >
> > > Though diff stat shows a lot of lines inserted/deleted they are moved lines.
> > > Pls review with diff.colorMoved.
> > >
> > > Alexei Starovoitov (4):
> > >   libbpf: Cleanup the layering between CORE and bpf_program.
> > >   libbpf: Split bpf_core_apply_relo() into bpf_program indepdent helper.
> > >   libbpf: Move CO-RE types into relo_core.h.
> > >   libbpf: Split CO-RE logic into relo_core.c.
> > >
> >
> > LGTM. Applied to bpf-next, fixed typo in patch 3 subject, and also
> > made few adjustments. Let me know if you object to any of them:
> >
> > 1. I felt like the original copyright year should be preserved when
> > moving code into a new file, so I've changed relo_core.h's year to
> > 2019. Hope that's fine.
> > 2. relo_core.c didn't have a Copyright line, so I added the /*
> > Copyright (c) 2019 Facebook */ as well.
> > 3. I trimmed down the list of #includes in core_relo.c, because most
> > of them were absolutely irrelevant and just preserved as-is from
> > libbpf.c Everything seems to compile just fine without those.
>
> Thanks! Much appreciate it.
> It was on my todo list. I lazily copy-pasted them to avoid
> accidental breakage on some archs that I don't have access to
> (since I didn't wait for the kernel build bot to process them before I
> sent them).
> fyi intel folks can include your private tree as well, so you'd have to respin
> your patches due to odd 32-bit build breakage. Just email them with
> your git tree location.

yeah, that's a good idea, I'll email them