netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] bpf: Add bpf_task_under

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]

Date: Thu, 4 May 2023 23:58:14 -0700
From: Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>
To: Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
Cc: martin.lau@...ux.dev, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, 
	andrii@...nel.org, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com, 
	kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net, 
	edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, mykolal@...com, 
	shuah@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, 
	yangzhenze@...edance.com, wangdongdong.6@...edance.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/2] bpf: Add bpf_task_under_cgroup() kfunc

On Thu, May 4, 2023 at 11:08 PM Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com> wrote:
>
<...>
> ---
>  kernel/bpf/helpers.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> index bb6b4637ebf2..453cbd312366 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/helpers.c
> @@ -2149,6 +2149,25 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct cgroup *bpf_cgroup_from_id(u64 cgid)
>                 return NULL;
>         return cgrp;
>  }
> +
> +/**
> + * bpf_task_under_cgroup - wrap task_under_cgroup_hierarchy() as a kfunc, test
> + * task's membership of cgroup ancestry.
> + * @task: the task to be tested
> + * @ancestor: possible ancestor of @task's cgroup
> + *
> + * Tests whether @task's default cgroup hierarchy is a descendant of @ancestor.
> + * It follows all the same rules as cgroup_is_descendant, and only applies
> + * to the default hierarchy.
> + */
> +__bpf_kfunc long bpf_task_under_cgroup(struct task_struct *task,
> +                                      struct cgroup *ancestor)
> +{
> +       if (unlikely(!ancestor || !task))
> +               return -EINVAL;
> +
> +       return task_under_cgroup_hierarchy(task, ancestor);
> +}
>  #endif /* CONFIG_CGROUPS */
>

I wonder in what situation a null 'task' or 'ancestor' can be passed.
Please call out in the comment that the returned value can be a
negative error, so that writing if(bpf_task_under_cgroup()) may cause
surprising results.

Hao