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: <CAEf4BzadsJWcCm4e=Bc40EaLj_8dMRy-MrfF7uwF5ysdZgGnkA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2022 20:19:40 -0700 From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com> To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, razor@...ckwall.org, ast@...nel.org, andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, john.fastabend@...il.com, joannelkoong@...il.com, memxor@...il.com, toke@...hat.com, joe@...ium.io, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 07/10] libbpf: Add extended attach/detach opts On Tue, Oct 4, 2022 at 4:12 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> wrote: > > Extend libbpf attach opts and add a new detach opts API so this can be used > to add/remove fd-based tc BPF programs. For concrete usage examples, see the > extensive selftests that have been developed as part of this series. > > Co-developed-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org> > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@...ckwall.org> > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net> > --- > tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ > tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h | 17 +++++++++++++++-- > tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map | 1 + > 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c > index 18b1e91cc469..d1e338ac9a62 100644 > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c > @@ -670,6 +670,27 @@ int bpf_prog_detach2(int prog_fd, int target_fd, enum bpf_attach_type type) > return libbpf_err_errno(ret); > } > > +int bpf_prog_detach_opts(int prog_fd, int target_fd, > + enum bpf_attach_type type, > + const struct bpf_prog_detach_opts *opts) > +{ > + const size_t attr_sz = offsetofend(union bpf_attr, replace_bpf_fd); > + union bpf_attr attr; > + int ret; > + > + if (!OPTS_VALID(opts, bpf_prog_detach_opts)) > + return libbpf_err(-EINVAL); > + > + memset(&attr, 0, attr_sz); > + attr.target_fd = target_fd; > + attr.attach_bpf_fd = prog_fd; > + attr.attach_type = type; > + attr.attach_priority = OPTS_GET(opts, attach_priority, 0); > + > + ret = sys_bpf(BPF_PROG_DETACH, &attr, attr_sz); > + return libbpf_err_errno(ret); > +} > + > int bpf_link_create(int prog_fd, int target_fd, > enum bpf_attach_type attach_type, > const struct bpf_link_create_opts *opts) > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h > index bef7a5282188..96de58fecdbc 100644 > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h > @@ -286,8 +286,11 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_obj_get_opts(const char *pathname, > > struct bpf_prog_attach_opts { > size_t sz; /* size of this struct for forward/backward compatibility */ > - unsigned int flags; > - int replace_prog_fd; > + __u32 flags; > + union { > + int replace_prog_fd; > + __u32 attach_priority; > + }; just add a new field, unions are very confusing in API structures. It's ok if some unused fields stay zero. > }; > #define bpf_prog_attach_opts__last_field replace_prog_fd > > @@ -296,9 +299,19 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_prog_attach(int prog_fd, int attachable_fd, > LIBBPF_API int bpf_prog_attach_opts(int prog_fd, int attachable_fd, > enum bpf_attach_type type, > const struct bpf_prog_attach_opts *opts); > + > +struct bpf_prog_detach_opts { > + size_t sz; /* size of this struct for forward/backward compatibility */ > + __u32 attach_priority; please add size_t: 0; at the end to ensure better zero-initialization by compiler > +}; > +#define bpf_prog_detach_opts__last_field attach_priority > + > LIBBPF_API int bpf_prog_detach(int attachable_fd, enum bpf_attach_type type); > LIBBPF_API int bpf_prog_detach2(int prog_fd, int attachable_fd, > enum bpf_attach_type type); > +LIBBPF_API int bpf_prog_detach_opts(int prog_fd, int target_fd, > + enum bpf_attach_type type, given we add detach_opts API, is type something that always makes sense? If not, let's move it into opts. > + const struct bpf_prog_detach_opts *opts); > > union bpf_iter_link_info; /* defined in up-to-date linux/bpf.h */ > struct bpf_link_create_opts { > diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map > index c1d6aa7c82b6..0c94b4862ebb 100644 > --- a/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map > +++ b/tools/lib/bpf/libbpf.map > @@ -377,4 +377,5 @@ LIBBPF_1.1.0 { > user_ring_buffer__reserve; > user_ring_buffer__reserve_blocking; > user_ring_buffer__submit; > + bpf_prog_detach_opts; let's keep this sorted > } LIBBPF_1.0.0; > -- > 2.34.1 >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists