Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 12/21] bpf: add PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL support

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 





On 5/10/20 9:11 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 10:19 PM Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> wrote:



On 5/9/20 5:50 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Sat, May 09, 2020 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Yonghong Song wrote:
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/btf.c b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
index a2cfba89a8e1..c490fbde22d4 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/btf.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/btf.c
@@ -3790,7 +3790,10 @@ bool btf_ctx_access(int off, int size, enum bpf_access_type type,
              return true;

      /* this is a pointer to another type */
-    info->reg_type = PTR_TO_BTF_ID;
+    if (off != 0 && prog->aux->btf_id_or_null_non0_off)
+            info->reg_type = PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL;
+    else
+            info->reg_type = PTR_TO_BTF_ID;

I think the verifier should be smarter than this.
It's too specific and inflexible. All ctx fields of bpf_iter execpt first
will be such ? let's figure out a different way to tell verifier about this.
How about using typedef with specific suffix? Like:
typedef struct bpf_map *bpf_map_or_null;
   struct bpf_iter__bpf_map {
     struct bpf_iter_meta *meta;
     bpf_map_or_null map;
   };
or use a union with specific second member? Like:
   struct bpf_iter__bpf_map {
     struct bpf_iter_meta *meta;
     union {
       struct bpf_map *map;
       long null;
     };
   };

I have an alternative approach to refactor this for future
support for map elements as well.

For example, for bpf_map_elements iterator the prog context type
can be
      struct bpf_iter_bpf_map_elem {
         struct bpf_iter_meta *meta;
         strruct bpf_map *map;
         <key type>  *key;
         <value type> *val;
     };

target will pass the following information to bpf_iter registration:
     arg 1: PTR_TO_BTF_ID
     arg 2: PTR_TO_BTF_ID_OR_NULL
     arg 3: PTR_TO_BUFFER
     arg 4: PTR_TO_BUFFER

verifier will retrieve the reg_type from target.

you mean to introduce something like 'struct bpf_func_proto'
that describes types of helpers, but instead something similar
to clarify the types in ctx ? That should work. Thanks

Yes, this is what I think will be extensible.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux