On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 11:24:28PM IST, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 04, 2021 at 12:01:13PM +0530, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > This is used by BPF_LINK_UPDATE to replace the attach SCHED_CLS bpf prog
> > effectively changing the classifier implementation for a given filter
> > owned by a bpf_link.
> >
> > Note that READ_ONCE suffices in this case as the ordering for loads from
> > the filter are implicitly provided by the data dependency on BPF prog
> > pointer.
> >
> > On the writer side we can just use a relaxed WRITE_ONCE store to make
> > sure one or the other value is visible to a reader in cls_bpf_classify.
> > Lifetime is managed using RCU so bpf_prog_put path should wait until
> > readers are done for old_prog.
>
> Should those be rcu_deref and rcu_assign_pointer ?
> Typically the pointer would be __rcu annotated which would be
> another small change in struct cls_bpf_prog.
> That would make the life time easier to follow?
>
True, I'll make that change.
> > All other parties accessing the BPF prog are under RTNL protection, so
> > need no changes.
> >
> > Reviewed-by: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@xxxxxxxxxx>.
> > Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > net/sched/cls_bpf.c | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> > 1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/sched/cls_bpf.c b/net/sched/cls_bpf.c
> > index bf61ffbb7fd0..f23304685c48 100644
> > --- a/net/sched/cls_bpf.c
> > +++ b/net/sched/cls_bpf.c
> > @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@
> > * (C) 2013 Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > */
> >
> > +#include <linux/atomic.h>
> > #include <linux/module.h>
> > #include <linux/types.h>
> > #include <linux/skbuff.h>
> > @@ -104,11 +105,11 @@ static int cls_bpf_classify(struct sk_buff *skb, const struct tcf_proto *tp,
> > /* It is safe to push/pull even if skb_shared() */
> > __skb_push(skb, skb->mac_len);
> > bpf_compute_data_pointers(skb);
> > - filter_res = BPF_PROG_RUN(prog->filter, skb);
> > + filter_res = BPF_PROG_RUN(READ_ONCE(prog->filter), skb);
> > __skb_pull(skb, skb->mac_len);
> > } else {
> > bpf_compute_data_pointers(skb);
> > - filter_res = BPF_PROG_RUN(prog->filter, skb);
> > + filter_res = BPF_PROG_RUN(READ_ONCE(prog->filter), skb);
> > }
> >
> > if (prog->exts_integrated) {
> > @@ -775,6 +776,55 @@ static int cls_bpf_link_detach(struct bpf_link *link)
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int cls_bpf_link_update(struct bpf_link *link, struct bpf_prog *new_prog,
> > + struct bpf_prog *old_prog)
> > +{
> > + struct cls_bpf_link *cls_link;
> > + struct cls_bpf_prog cls_prog;
> > + struct cls_bpf_prog *prog;
> > + int ret;
> > +
> > + rtnl_lock();
> > +
> > + cls_link = container_of(link, struct cls_bpf_link, link);
> > + if (!cls_link->prog) {
> > + ret = -ENOLINK;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + prog = cls_link->prog;
> > +
> > + /* BPF_F_REPLACEing? */
> > + if (old_prog && prog->filter != old_prog) {
> > + ret = -EINVAL;
>
> Other places like cgroup_bpf_replace and bpf_iter_link_replace
> return -EPERM in such case.
>
Ok, will change.
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + old_prog = prog->filter;
> > +
> > + if (new_prog == old_prog) {
> > + ret = 0;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + cls_prog = *prog;
> > + cls_prog.filter = new_prog;
> > +
> > + ret = cls_bpf_offload(prog->tp, &cls_prog, prog, NULL);
> > + if (ret < 0)
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + WRITE_ONCE(prog->filter, new_prog);
> > +
> > + bpf_prog_inc(new_prog);
> > + /* release our reference */
> > + bpf_prog_put(old_prog);
> > +
> > +out:
> > + rtnl_unlock();
> > + return ret;
> > +}
> > +
> > static void __bpf_fill_link_info(struct cls_bpf_link *link,
> > struct bpf_link_info *info)
> > {
> > @@ -859,6 +909,7 @@ static const struct bpf_link_ops cls_bpf_link_ops = {
> > .show_fdinfo = cls_bpf_link_show_fdinfo,
> > #endif
> > .fill_link_info = cls_bpf_link_fill_link_info,
> > + .update_prog = cls_bpf_link_update,
> > };
> >
> > static inline char *cls_bpf_link_name(u32 prog_id, const char *name)
> > --
> > 2.31.1
> >
>
> --
--
Kartikeya
