netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_PROG_TYPE_VNET

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: Wed, 22 Nov 2023 14:36:32 +0900
From: Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com>
To: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
 Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
 Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
 Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
 Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
 John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
 Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
 Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
 Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
 "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
 Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
 "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, Xuan Zhuo
 <xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com>, Mykola Lysenko <mykolal@...com>,
 Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
 "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
 LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
 virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
 "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>,
 Yuri Benditovich <yuri.benditovich@...nix.com>,
 Andrew Melnychenko <andrew@...nix.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2 1/7] bpf: Introduce BPF_PROG_TYPE_VNET_HASH

On 2023/11/22 14:25, Song Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 20, 2023 at 12:05 AM Akihiko Odaki <akihiko.odaki@...nix.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 2023/11/20 6:02, Song Liu wrote:
> [...]
>>>> In contrast, our intended use case is more like a normal application.
>>>> So, for example, a user may download a container and run QEMU (including
>>>> the BPF program) installed in the container. As such, it is nice if the
>>>> ABI is stable across kernel releases, but it is not guaranteed for
>>>> kfuncs. Such a use case is already covered with the eBPF steering
>>>> program so I want to maintain it if possible.
>>>
>>> TBH, I don't think stability should be a concern for kfuncs used by QEMU.
>>> Many core BPF APIs are now implemented as kfuncs: bpf_dynptr_*,
>>> bpf_rcu_*, etc. As long as there are valid use cases,these kfuncs will
>>> be supported.
>>
>> Documentation/bpf/kfuncs.rst still says:
>>   > kfuncs provide a kernel <-> kernel API, and thus are not bound by any
>>   > of the strict stability restrictions associated with kernel <-> user
>>   > UAPIs.
>>
>> Is it possible to change the statement like as follows:
>> "Most kfuncs provide a kernel <-> kernel API, and thus are not bound by
>> any of the strict stability restrictions associated with kernel <-> user
>> UAPIs. kfuncs that have same stability restrictions associated with
>> UAPIs are exceptional, and must be carefully reviewed by subsystem (and
>> BPF?) maintainers as any other UAPIs are."
> 
> I am afraid this is against the intention to not guarantee UAPI-level stability
> for kfuncs.

Is it possible to ensure that a QEMU binary with the eBPF program 
included works on different kernel versions without UAPI-level stability 
then? Otherwise, I think we need to think of the minimal UAPI addition 
that exposes the feature I propose, and the two options I presented 
first are the candidates of such: the stable BPF change or tuntap 
interface change.

Regards,
Akihiko Odaki