Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx> writes:
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2021 at 04:40:33PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> With the introduction of the struct_ops program type, it became possible to
>> implement kernel functionality in BPF, making it viable to use BPF in place
>> of a regular kernel module for these particular operations.
>>
>> Thus far, the only user of this mechanism is for implementing TCP
>> congestion control algorithms. These are clearly marked as GPL-only when
>> implemented as modules (as seen by the use of EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL for
>> tcp_register_congestion_control()), so it seems like an oversight that this
>> was not carried over to BPF implementations. And sine this is the only user
>> of the struct_ops mechanism, just enforcing GPL-only for the struct_ops
>> program type seems like the simplest way to fix this.
>>
>> Fixes: 0baf26b0fcd7 ("bpf: tcp: Support tcp_congestion_ops in bpf")
>> Signed-off-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 5 +++++
>> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> index 44e4ec1640f1..48dd0c0f087c 100644
>> --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
>> @@ -12166,6 +12166,11 @@ static int check_struct_ops_btf_id(struct bpf_verifier_env *env)
>> return -ENOTSUPP;
>> }
>>
>> + if (!prog->gpl_compatible) {
>> + verbose(env, "struct ops programs must have a GPL compatible license\n");
>> + return -EINVAL;
>> + }
>> +
> Thanks for the patch.
>
> A nit. Instead of sitting in between of the attach_btf_id check
> and expected_attach_type check, how about moving it to the beginning
> of this function. Checking attach_btf_id and expected_attach_type
> would make more sense to be done next to each other as in the current
> code.
Yeah, good point. Not sure what I was thinking stuffing it in the middle
there; will fix and send a v2!
> Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@xxxxxx>
Thanks! :)
-Toke
