netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/16] bpf: Realign skb metadata for TC progs using data

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: <87bjj7988a.fsf@cloudflare.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Jan 2026 20:20:53 +0100
From: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Amery Hung <ameryhung@...il.com>,  Martin KaFai Lau
 <martin.lau@...nel.org>,  bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,  Network Development
 <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,  "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,  Eric
 Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,  Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,  Paolo
 Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,  Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,  Daniel
 Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
 <hawk@...nel.org>,  John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,  Stanislav
 Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,  Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,  Andrii
 Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,  Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
  Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>,  Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
  Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,  KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
  Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,  Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,  kernel-team
 <kernel-team@...udflare.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 15/16] bpf: Realign skb metadata for TC
 progs using data_meta

On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 11:14 AM -08, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 4:15 AM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> +__bpf_kfunc_start_defs();
>> +
>> +__bpf_kfunc void bpf_skb_meta_realign(struct __sk_buff *skb_)
>> +{
>> +       struct sk_buff *skb = (typeof(skb))skb_;
>> +       u8 *meta_end = skb_metadata_end(skb);
>> +       u8 meta_len = skb_metadata_len(skb);
>> +       u8 *meta;
>> +       int gap;
>> +
>> +       gap = skb_mac_header(skb) - meta_end;
>> +       if (!meta_len || !gap)
>> +               return;
>> +
>> +       if (WARN_ONCE(gap < 0, "skb metadata end past mac header")) {
>> +               skb_metadata_clear(skb);
>> +               return;
>> +       }
>> +
>> +       meta = meta_end - meta_len;
>> +       memmove(meta + gap, meta, meta_len);
>> +       skb_shinfo(skb)->meta_end += gap;
>> +
>> +       bpf_compute_data_pointers(skb);
>> +}
>> +
>> +__bpf_kfunc_end_defs();
>> +
>> +BTF_KFUNCS_START(tc_cls_act_hidden_ids)
>> +BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_skb_meta_realign)
>> +BTF_KFUNCS_END(tc_cls_act_hidden_ids)
>> +
>> +BTF_ID_LIST_SINGLE(bpf_skb_meta_realign_ids, func, bpf_skb_meta_realign)
>> +
>>  static int tc_cls_act_prologue(struct bpf_insn *insn_buf, u32 pkt_access_flags,
>>                                const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>  {
>> -       return bpf_unclone_prologue(insn_buf, pkt_access_flags, prog,
>> -                                   TC_ACT_SHOT);
>> +       struct bpf_insn *insn = insn_buf;
>> +       int cnt;
>> +
>> +       if (pkt_access_flags & PA_F_DATA_META_LOAD) {
>> +               /* Realign skb metadata for access through data_meta pointer.
>> +                *
>> +                * r6 = r1; // r6 will be "u64 *ctx"
>> +                * r0 = bpf_skb_meta_realign(r1); // r0 is undefined
>> +                * r1 = r6;
>> +                */
>> +               *insn++ = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1);
>> +               *insn++ = BPF_CALL_KFUNC(0, bpf_skb_meta_realign_ids[0]);
>> +               *insn++ = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6);
>> +       }
>
> I see that we already did this hack with bpf_qdisc_init_prologue()
> and bpf_qdisc_reset_destroy_epilogue().
> Not sure why we went that route back then.

Right. That's where I "stole" it from.

> imo much cleaner to do BPF_EMIT_CALL() and wrap
> BPF_CALL_1(bpf_skb_meta_realign, struct sk_buff *, skb)
>
> BPF_CALL_x doesn't make it an uapi helper.
> It's still a hidden kernel function,
> while this kfunc stuff looks wrong, since kfunc isn't really hidden.
>
> I suspect progs can call this bpf_skb_meta_realign() explicitly,
> just like they can call bpf_qdisc_init_prologue() ?

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction. Will rework this.