diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v2,4/4] bpf: enable bpf_{g,s}etsockopt in BPF_CGROUP_UDP{4,6}_RECVMSG

Message ID 20210127232853.3753823-5-sdf@google.com (mailing list archive)
State Accepted
Commit 4c3384d7abe58a68d78fd1b8b3bffbf62e1e29a1
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series bpf: expose bpf_{g,s}etsockopt to more bpf_sock_addr hooks | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
netdev/cover_letter success Link
netdev/fixes_present success Link
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 10 maintainers not CCed: shuah@kernel.org songliubraving@fb.com linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org andrii@kernel.org kpsingh@kernel.org davem@davemloft.net john.fastabend@gmail.com kuba@kernel.org kafai@fb.com yhs@fb.com
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Link
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 45 this patch: 45
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/verify_fixes success Link
netdev/checkpatch success total: 0 errors, 0 warnings, 0 checks, 50 lines checked
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 45 this patch: 45
netdev/header_inline success Link
netdev/stable success Stable not CCed

Commit Message

Stanislav Fomichev Jan. 27, 2021, 11:28 p.m. UTC
Those hooks run as BPF_CGROUP_RUN_SA_PROG_LOCK and operate on
a locked socket.

Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
---
 net/core/filter.c                                 | 4 ++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c | 5 +++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c | 5 +++++
 3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)

Comments

Daniel Borkmann Jan. 29, 2021, 12:52 a.m. UTC | #1
On 1/28/21 12:28 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Those hooks run as BPF_CGROUP_RUN_SA_PROG_LOCK and operate on
> a locked socket.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> ---
>   net/core/filter.c                                 | 4 ++++
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c | 5 +++++
>   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c | 5 +++++
>   3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> index ba436b1d70c2..e15d4741719a 100644
> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> @@ -7023,6 +7023,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> +		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> +		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
> @@ -7039,6 +7041,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> +		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> +		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
>   		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:

Looks good overall, also thanks for adding the test cases! I was about to apply, but noticed one
small nit that would be good to get resolved before that. Above you now list all the attach hooks
for sock_addr ctx, so we should just remove the whole switch that tests on prog->expected_attach_type
altogether in this last commit.

Thanks,
Daniel
Stanislav Fomichev Jan. 29, 2021, 12:59 a.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:52 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>
> On 1/28/21 12:28 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > Those hooks run as BPF_CGROUP_RUN_SA_PROG_LOCK and operate on
> > a locked socket.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> > ---
> >   net/core/filter.c                                 | 4 ++++
> >   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c | 5 +++++
> >   tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c | 5 +++++
> >   3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> > index ba436b1d70c2..e15d4741719a 100644
> > --- a/net/core/filter.c
> > +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> > @@ -7023,6 +7023,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> > +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> > +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
> > @@ -7039,6 +7041,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> > +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> > +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
> >               case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
>
> Looks good overall, also thanks for adding the test cases! I was about to apply, but noticed one
> small nit that would be good to get resolved before that. Above you now list all the attach hooks
> for sock_addr ctx, so we should just remove the whole switch that tests on prog->expected_attach_type
> altogether in this last commit.
Sure, I can resend tomorrow.
But do you think it's safe and there won't ever be another sock_addr
hook that runs with an unlocked socket?
Daniel Borkmann Jan. 29, 2021, 1:08 a.m. UTC | #3
On 1/29/21 1:59 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:52 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>> On 1/28/21 12:28 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
>>> Those hooks run as BPF_CGROUP_RUN_SA_PROG_LOCK and operate on
>>> a locked socket.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
>>> ---
>>>    net/core/filter.c                                 | 4 ++++
>>>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c | 5 +++++
>>>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c | 5 +++++
>>>    3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
>>> index ba436b1d70c2..e15d4741719a 100644
>>> --- a/net/core/filter.c
>>> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
>>> @@ -7023,6 +7023,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
>>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
>>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
>>> @@ -7039,6 +7041,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
>>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
>>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
>>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
>>
>> Looks good overall, also thanks for adding the test cases! I was about to apply, but noticed one
>> small nit that would be good to get resolved before that. Above you now list all the attach hooks
>> for sock_addr ctx, so we should just remove the whole switch that tests on prog->expected_attach_type
>> altogether in this last commit.
> Sure, I can resend tomorrow.
> But do you think it's safe and there won't ever be another sock_addr
> hook that runs with an unlocked socket?

Ok, that rationale seems reasonable to keep the series as is. It probably makes sense to add a
small comment at least to the commit log to explain the reasoning, I can do so while applying.
So no need for v3, thanks!
Stanislav Fomichev Jan. 29, 2021, 1:14 a.m. UTC | #4
On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 5:08 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
>
> On 1/29/21 1:59 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 4:52 PM Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> wrote:
> >> On 1/28/21 12:28 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> >>> Those hooks run as BPF_CGROUP_RUN_SA_PROG_LOCK and operate on
> >>> a locked socket.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    net/core/filter.c                                 | 4 ++++
> >>>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c | 5 +++++
> >>>    tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c | 5 +++++
> >>>    3 files changed, 14 insertions(+)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
> >>> index ba436b1d70c2..e15d4741719a 100644
> >>> --- a/net/core/filter.c
> >>> +++ b/net/core/filter.c
> >>> @@ -7023,6 +7023,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> >>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> >>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
> >>> @@ -7039,6 +7041,8 @@ sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
> >>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
> >>> +             case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
> >>>                case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
> >>
> >> Looks good overall, also thanks for adding the test cases! I was about to apply, but noticed one
> >> small nit that would be good to get resolved before that. Above you now list all the attach hooks
> >> for sock_addr ctx, so we should just remove the whole switch that tests on prog->expected_attach_type
> >> altogether in this last commit.
> > Sure, I can resend tomorrow.
> > But do you think it's safe and there won't ever be another sock_addr
> > hook that runs with an unlocked socket?
>
> Ok, that rationale seems reasonable to keep the series as is. It probably makes sense to add a
> small comment at least to the commit log to explain the reasoning, I can do so while applying.
> So no need for v3, thanks!
Sounds good, thank you!
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index ba436b1d70c2..e15d4741719a 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -7023,6 +7023,8 @@  sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
+		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
+		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
@@ -7039,6 +7041,8 @@  sock_addr_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const struct bpf_prog *prog)
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_BIND:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_CONNECT:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET6_CONNECT:
+		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_RECVMSG:
+		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_RECVMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP4_SENDMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_UDP6_SENDMSG:
 		case BPF_CGROUP_INET4_GETPEERNAME:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c
index fc2fe8a952fa..3d1ae8b3402f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg4_prog.c
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ 
 #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
 #include <bpf/bpf_endian.h>
 
+#include <bpf_sockopt_helpers.h>
+
 #define SERV4_IP		0xc0a801feU /* 192.168.1.254 */
 #define SERV4_PORT		4040
 
@@ -28,6 +30,9 @@  int recvmsg4_prog(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
 	if (ctx->type != SOCK_STREAM && ctx->type != SOCK_DGRAM)
 		return 1;
 
+	if (!get_set_sk_priority(ctx))
+		return 1;
+
 	ctx->user_ip4 = bpf_htonl(SERV4_IP);
 	ctx->user_port = bpf_htons(SERV4_PORT);
 
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c
index 6060fd63324b..27dfb21b21b4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/recvmsg6_prog.c
@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ 
 #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
 #include <bpf/bpf_endian.h>
 
+#include <bpf_sockopt_helpers.h>
+
 #define SERV6_IP_0		0xfaceb00c /* face:b00c:1234:5678::abcd */
 #define SERV6_IP_1		0x12345678
 #define SERV6_IP_2		0x00000000
@@ -31,6 +33,9 @@  int recvmsg6_prog(struct bpf_sock_addr *ctx)
 	if (ctx->type != SOCK_STREAM && ctx->type != SOCK_DGRAM)
 		return 1;
 
+	if (!get_set_sk_priority(ctx))
+		return 1;
+
 	ctx->user_ip6[0] = bpf_htonl(SERV6_IP_0);
 	ctx->user_ip6[1] = bpf_htonl(SERV6_IP_1);
 	ctx->user_ip6[2] = bpf_htonl(SERV6_IP_2);