netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 00/10] bpf: fsession support

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CADxym3Z5vPsNktM6ehc5E=9HBqdYwRRyFcyfDLASoz0bjMGQcg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2026 20:48:27 +0800
From: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com>
Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, 
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, 
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, 
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>, Eduard <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, 
	Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, 
	KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, 
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, 
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, jiang.biao@...ux.dev, 
	Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>, 
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, 
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v6 00/10] bpf: fsession support

On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 4:54 PM Jiri Olsa <olsajiri@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2026 at 03:20:13PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 5, 2026 at 2:33 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2026 at 4:28 AM Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In current solution, we can't reuse the existing bpf_session_cookie() and
> > > > bpf_session_is_return(), as their prototype is different from
> > > > bpf_fsession_is_return() and bpf_fsession_cookie(). In
> > > > bpf_fsession_cookie(), we need the function argument "void *ctx" to get
> > > > the cookie. However, the prototype of bpf_session_cookie() is "void".
> > >
> > > I think it's ok to change proto to bpf_session_cookie(void *ctx)
> > > for kprobe-session. It's not widely used yet, so proto change is ok
> > > if it helps to simplify this tramp-session code.
> > > I see that you adjust get_kfunc_ptr_arg_type(), so the verifier
> > > will enforce PTR_TO_CTX for kprobe and trampoline.
> > > Potentially can relax and enforce r1==ctx only for trampoline,
> > > but I would do it for both for consistency.
> >
> > Yeah, I'd support that. It's early enough that this shouldn't be
> > breaking a lot of users (if any).
> >
> > Jiri, do you guys use bpf_session_is_return() or bpf_session_cookie()
> > anywhere already?
>
> np, we can still adjust, it's in PR that's not merged yet

Nice, wait for me :)

>
> jirka