On Thu, Sep 05, 2019 at 12:34:36AM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > > > > On Sep 4, 2019, at 11:43 AM, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Implement permissions as stated in uapi/linux/capability.h > > > > Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > [...] > > > @@ -1648,11 +1648,11 @@ static int bpf_prog_load(union bpf_attr *attr, union bpf_attr __user *uattr) > > is_gpl = license_is_gpl_compatible(license); > > > > if (attr->insn_cnt == 0 || > > - attr->insn_cnt > (capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN) ? BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS : BPF_MAXINSNS)) > > + attr->insn_cnt > (capable_bpf() ? BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS : BPF_MAXINSNS)) > > return -E2BIG; > > if (type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER && > > type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB && > > - !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN)) > > + !capable_bpf()) > > return -EPERM; > > Do we allow load BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER and BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB > without CAP_BPF? If so, maybe highlight in the header? of course. there is no change in behavior. 'highlight in the header'? you mean in commit log? I think it's a bit weird to describe things in commit that patch is _not_ changing vs things that patch does actually change. This type of comment would be great in a doc though. The doc will be coming separately in the follow up assuming the whole thing lands. I'll remember to note that bit.
