On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 12:47:03PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Wed, Jul 22, 2020 at 2:14 PM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Adding d_path helper function that returns full path for > > given 'struct path' object, which needs to be the kernel > > BTF 'path' object. The path is returned in buffer provided > > 'buf' of size 'sz' and is zero terminated. > > > > bpf_d_path(&file->f_path, buf, size); > > > > The helper calls directly d_path function, so there's only > > limited set of function it can be called from. Adding just > > very modest set for the start. > > > > Updating also bpf.h tools uapi header and adding 'path' to > > bpf_helpers_doc.py script. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 13 +++++++++ > > kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 48 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > scripts/bpf_helpers_doc.py | 2 ++ > > tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 13 +++++++++ > > 4 files changed, 76 insertions(+) > > > > [...] > > > > > +BPF_CALL_3(bpf_d_path, struct path *, path, char *, buf, u32, sz) > > +{ > > + char *p = d_path(path, buf, sz - 1); > > + int len; > > + > > + if (IS_ERR(p)) { > > + len = PTR_ERR(p); > > + } else { > > + len = strlen(p); > > + if (len && p != buf) > > + memmove(buf, p, len); > > not sure if it's worth it, but if len == sz - 1 then memmove is not > necessary. Again, don't know if worth it, as it's probably not going > to be a common case. I did not see condition like that for d_path/file_path usage, I'll check if such return values are even possible > > > + buf[len] = 0; > > + /* Include the trailing NUL. */ > > + len++; > > + } > > + > > + return len; > > +} > > + > > +BTF_SET_START(btf_whitelist_d_path) > > +BTF_ID(func, vfs_truncate) > > +BTF_ID(func, vfs_fallocate) > > +BTF_ID(func, dentry_open) > > +BTF_ID(func, vfs_getattr) > > +BTF_ID(func, filp_close) > > +BTF_SET_END(btf_whitelist_d_path) > > > We should probably comply with an updated coding style ([0]) and use > an allowlist name for this? > > [0] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/commit/?id=49decddd39e5f6132ccd7d9fdc3d7c470b0061bb right, will change > > > + > > +static bool bpf_d_path_allowed(const struct bpf_prog *prog) > > +{ > > + return btf_id_set_contains(&btf_whitelist_d_path, prog->aux->attach_btf_id); > > +} > > + > > +BTF_ID_LIST(bpf_d_path_btf_ids) > > +BTF_ID(struct, path) > > + > > +static const struct bpf_func_proto bpf_d_path_proto = { > > + .func = bpf_d_path, > > + .gpl_only = false, > > + .ret_type = RET_INTEGER, > > + .arg1_type = ARG_PTR_TO_BTF_ID, > > + .arg2_type = ARG_PTR_TO_MEM, > > + .arg3_type = ARG_CONST_SIZE, > > I feel like we had a discussion about ARG_CONST_SIZE vs > ARG_CONST_SIZE_OR_ZERO before, maybe on some different thread. > Basically, this >0 restriction was a major nuisance for > bpf_perf_event_output() cases, so much that we changed it to _OR_ZERO. > In practice, while it might never be the case that we have sz == 0 > passed into the function, having to prove this to the verifier is a > PITA. Unless there is a very strong reason not to, let's mark this as > ARG_CONST_SIZE_OR_ZERO and handle sz == 0 case as a noop? sure, will change thanks, jirka