[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <202110251421.7056ACF84@keescook>
Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2021 14:24:34 -0700
From: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
To: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
Cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, arnaldo.melo@...il.com,
pmladek@...e.com, peterz@...radead.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
valentin.schneider@....com, qiang.zhang@...driver.com,
robdclark@...omium.org, christian@...uner.io,
dietmar.eggemann@....com, mingo@...hat.com, juri.lelli@...hat.com,
vincent.guittot@...aro.org, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
kafai@...com, songliubraving@...com, yhs@...com,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org,
dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com,
mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com, dledford@...hat.com,
jgg@...pe.ca, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, oliver.sang@...el.com, lkp@...el.com,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 08/12] tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton: make it adopt to
task comm size change
On Mon, Oct 25, 2021 at 08:33:11AM +0000, Yafang Shao wrote:
> bpf_probe_read_kernel_str() will add a nul terminator to the dst, then
> we don't care about if the dst size is big enough.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@...il.com>
> Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
> Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
> Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
> Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>
> Cc: Petr Mladek <pmladek@...e.com>
So, if we're ever going to copying these buffers out of the kernel (I
don't know what the object lifetime here in bpf is for "e", etc), we
should be zero-padding (as get_task_comm() does).
Should this, instead, be using a bounce buffer?
get_task_comm(comm, task->group_leader);
bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(&e.comm, sizeof(e.comm), comm);
-Kees
> ---
> tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton/pid_iter.bpf.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton/pid_iter.bpf.c b/tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton/pid_iter.bpf.c
> index d9b420972934..f70702fcb224 100644
> --- a/tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton/pid_iter.bpf.c
> +++ b/tools/bpf/bpftool/skeleton/pid_iter.bpf.c
> @@ -71,8 +71,8 @@ int iter(struct bpf_iter__task_file *ctx)
>
> e.pid = task->tgid;
> e.id = get_obj_id(file->private_data, obj_type);
> - bpf_probe_read_kernel(&e.comm, sizeof(e.comm),
> - task->group_leader->comm);
> + bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(&e.comm, sizeof(e.comm),
> + task->group_leader->comm);
> bpf_seq_write(ctx->meta->seq, &e, sizeof(e));
>
> return 0;
> --
> 2.17.1
>
--
Kees Cook
Powered by blists - more mailing lists