netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/11] libbpf: Update gen_loader to emit BTF_KIND

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: <CAADnVQKjoCLNYBwDvLjgG9cYxrZyhw1Bgvm0yzH0gUWQLNtZnw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 20 Sep 2021 17:57:16 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     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>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
        Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 08/11] libbpf: Update gen_loader to emit
 BTF_KIND_FUNC relocations

On Mon, Sep 20, 2021 at 7:15 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi
<memxor@...il.com> wrote:
>
> This change updates the BPF syscall loader to relocate BTF_KIND_FUNC
> relocations, with support for weak kfunc relocations. The next commit
> adds bpftool supports to set up the fd_array_sz parameter for light
> skeleton.
>
> A second map for keeping fds is used instead of adding fds to existing
> loader.map because of following reasons:

but it complicates signing bpf progs a lot.

> If reserving an area for map and BTF fds, we would waste the remaining
> of (MAX_USED_MAPS + MAX_KFUNC_DESCS) * sizeof(int), which in most cases
> will be unused by the program. Also, we must place some limit on the
> amount of map and BTF fds a program can possibly open.

That is just (256 + 64)*4 bytes of data. Really not much.
I wouldn't worry about reserving this space.

> If setting gen->fd_array to first map_fd offset, and then just finding
> the offset relative to this (for later BTF fds), such that they can be
> packed without wasting space, we run the risk of unnecessarily running
> out of valid offset for emit_relo stage (for kfuncs), because gen map
> creation and relocation stages are separated by other steps that can add
> lots of data (including bpf_object__populate_internal_map). It is also
> prone to break silently if features are added between map and BTF fd
> emits that possibly add more data (just ~128KB to break BTF fd, since
> insn->off allows for INT16_MAX (32767) * 4 bytes).

I don't follow this logic.

> Both of these issues are compounded by the fact that data map is shared
> by all programs, so it is easy to end up with invalid offset for BTF fd.

I don't follow this either. There is only one map and one program.
What sharing are you talking about?