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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <46cabc2c-fc7f-5699-dfcb-b8be686ed200@linux.dev> Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2022 13:10:32 -0700 From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev> To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> Cc: razor@...ckwall.org, ast@...nel.org, andrii@...nel.org, john.fastabend@...il.com, joannelkoong@...il.com, memxor@...il.com, toke@...hat.com, joe@...ium.io, netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 02/10] bpf: Implement BPF link handling for tc BPF programs On 10/4/22 4:11 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > static int __xtc_prog_detach(struct net_device *dev, bool ingress, u32 limit, > - u32 prio) > + u32 id, u32 prio) > { > struct bpf_prog_array_item *item, *tmp; > struct bpf_prog *oprog, *fprog = NULL; > @@ -126,8 +133,11 @@ static int __xtc_prog_detach(struct net_device *dev, bool ingress, u32 limit, > if (item->bpf_priority != prio) { > tmp->prog = oprog; > tmp->bpf_priority = item->bpf_priority; > + tmp->bpf_id = item->bpf_id; > j++; > } else { > + if (item->bpf_id != id) > + return -EBUSY; A nit. Should this be -ENOENT? I think the cgroup detach is also returning -ENOENT for the not found case. btw, this case should only happen from the BPF_PROG_DETACH but not the BPF_LINK_DETACH?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists