Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 1/1] bpftool: bpf skeletons assert type sizes

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

 



On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 4:12 PM Delyan Kratunov <delyank@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> When emitting type declarations in skeletons, bpftool will now also emit
> static assertions on the size of the data/bss/rodata/etc fields. This
> ensures that in situations where userspace and kernel types have the same
> name but differ in size we do not silently produce incorrect results but
> instead break the build.
>
> This was reported in [1] and as expected the repro in [2] fails to build
> on the new size assert after this change.
>
>   [1]: Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/issues/433
>   [2]: https://github.com/fuweid/iovisor-bcc-pr-3777
>
> Signed-off-by: Delyan Kratunov <delyank@xxxxxx>
> ---

LGTM with a trivial styling nits. But this doesn't apply cleanly to
bpf-next (see [0]). Can you please rebase and resend. Also for
single-patch submissions we don't require cover letter, to please just
put all the description into one patch without cover letter.

  [0] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/pull/2563#issuecomment-1040929960

>  tools/bpf/bpftool/gen.c | 134 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  1 file changed, 112 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)

[...]

> +
> +       bpf_object__for_each_map(map, obj) {
> +               if (!bpf_map__is_internal(map))
> +                       continue;
> +               if (!(bpf_map__map_flags(map) & BPF_F_MMAPABLE))
> +                       continue;
> +               if (!get_map_ident(map, map_ident, sizeof(map_ident)))
> +                       continue;
> +
> +               sec = find_type_for_map(obj, map_ident);
> +

nit: unnecessary empty line between assignment and "error checking"

> +               if (!sec) {
> +                       /* best effort, couldn't find the type for this map */
> +                       continue;
> +               }
> +
> +               sec_var = btf_var_secinfos(sec);
> +               vlen =  btf_vlen(sec);
> +
> +               for (i = 0; i < vlen; i++, sec_var++) {
> +                       const struct btf_type *var = btf__type_by_id(btf, sec_var->type);
> +                       const char *var_name = btf__name_by_offset(btf, var->name_off);
> +                       __u32 var_type_id = var->type;
> +                       __s64 var_size = btf__resolve_size(btf, var_type_id);
> +
> +                       if (var_size < 0)
> +                               continue;
> +
> +                       /* static variables are not exposed through BPF skeleton */
> +                       if (btf_var(var)->linkage == BTF_VAR_STATIC)
> +                               continue;
> +
> +                       var_ident[0] = '\0';
> +                       strncat(var_ident, var_name, sizeof(var_ident) - 1);
> +                       sanitize_identifier(var_ident);
> +
> +                       printf("\t_Static_assert(");
> +                       printf("sizeof(s->%1$s->%2$s) == %3$lld, ",
> +                              map_ident, var_ident, var_size);
> +                       printf("\"unexpected size of '%1$s'\");\n", var_ident);

nit: I'd keep this as one printf, it makes it a bit easier to follow.

> +               }
> +       }

[...]



[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