netdev - Re: [PATCH 08/13] bpf: Add kprobe link for attaching raw kprobes

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: <YdarSovbcmoY9lI6@krava>
Date:   Thu, 6 Jan 2022 09:41:46 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        "Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.ibm.com>,
        Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 08/13] bpf: Add kprobe link for attaching raw kprobes

On Wed, Jan 05, 2022 at 08:30:56PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 4, 2022 at 12:10 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com> wrote:
> >
> > Adding new link type BPF_LINK_TYPE_KPROBE to attach kprobes
> > directly through register_kprobe/kretprobe API.
> >
> > Adding new attach type BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE that enables
> > such link for kprobe program.
> >
> > The new link allows to create multiple kprobes link by using
> > new link_create interface:
> >
> >   struct {
> >     __aligned_u64   addrs;
> >     __u32           cnt;
> >     __u64           bpf_cookie;
> 
> I'm afraid bpf_cookie has to be different for each addr, otherwise
> it's severely limiting. So it would be an array of cookies alongside
> an array of addresses

ok

> 
> >   } kprobe;
> >
> > Plus new flag BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN for link_create.flags to
> > create return probe.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
> > ---
> >  include/linux/bpf_types.h      |   1 +
> >  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h       |  12 +++
> >  kernel/bpf/syscall.c           | 191 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h |  12 +++
> >  4 files changed, 211 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> 
> [...]
> 
> > @@ -1111,6 +1113,11 @@ enum bpf_link_type {
> >   */
> >  #define BPF_F_SLEEPABLE                (1U << 4)
> >
> > +/* link_create flags used in LINK_CREATE command for BPF_TRACE_RAW_KPROBE
> > + * attach type.
> > + */
> > +#define BPF_F_KPROBE_RETURN    (1U << 0)
> > +
> 
> we have plenty of flexibility to have per-link type fields, so why not
> add `bool is_retprobe` next to addrs and cnt?

well I thought if I do that, people would suggest to use the empty
flags field instead ;-) 

we can move it there as you suggest, but I wonder it's good idea to
use bool in uapi headers, because the bool size definition is vague

jirka

> 
> >  /* When BPF ldimm64's insn[0].src_reg != 0 then this can have
> >   * the following extensions:
> >   *
> > @@ -1465,6 +1472,11 @@ union bpf_attr {
> >                                  */
> >                                 __u64           bpf_cookie;
> >                         } perf_event;
> > +                       struct {
> > +                               __aligned_u64   addrs;
> > +                               __u32           cnt;
> > +                               __u64           bpf_cookie;
> > +                       } kprobe;
> >                 };
> >         } link_create;
> >
> 
> [...]
>