Hi Willem,
On Sun, Dec 09, 2012 at 04:52:58PM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> Support arbitrary linux socket filter (BPF) programs as iptables
> match rules. This allows for very expressive filters, and on
> platforms with BPF JIT appears competitive with traditional hardcoded
> iptables rules.
>
> At least, on an x86_64 that achieves 40K netperf TCP_STREAM without
> any iptables rules (40 GBps),
>
> inserting 100x this bpf rule gives 28K
>
> ./iptables -A OUTPUT -m bpf --bytecode '6,40 0 0 14, 21 0 3 2048,48 0 0 25,21 0 1 20,6 0 0 96,6 0 0 0,' -j
>
> (as generated by tcpdump -i any -ddd ip proto 20 | tr '\n' ',')
>
> inserting 100x this u32 rule gives 21K
>
> ./iptables -A OUTPUT -m u32 --u32 '6&0xFF=0x20' -j DROP
>
> The two are logically equivalent, as far as I can tell. Let me know
> if my test methodology is flawed in some way. Even in cases where
> slower, the filter adds functionality currently lacking in iptables,
> such as access to sk_buff fields like rxhash and queue_mapping.
>
> Signed-off-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> include/linux/netfilter/xt_bpf.h | 17 +++++++
> net/netfilter/Kconfig | 9 ++++
> net/netfilter/Makefile | 1 +
> net/netfilter/x_tables.c | 5 +-
> net/netfilter/xt_bpf.c | 86 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 5 files changed, 116 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 include/linux/netfilter/xt_bpf.h
> create mode 100644 net/netfilter/xt_bpf.c
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netfilter/xt_bpf.h b/include/linux/netfilter/xt_bpf.h
> new file mode 100644
> index 0000000..23502c0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/include/linux/netfilter/xt_bpf.h
> @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
> +#ifndef _XT_BPF_H
> +#define _XT_BPF_H
> +
> +#include <linux/filter.h>
> +#include <linux/types.h>
> +
> +struct xt_bpf_info {
> + __u16 bpf_program_num_elem;
> +
> + /* only used in kernel */
> + struct sk_filter *filter __attribute__((aligned(8)));
I see. You set match->userspacesize to zero in libxt_bpf to skip the
comparison of that internal struct sk_filter *filter.
> +
> + /* variable size, based on program_num_elem */
> + struct sock_filter bpf_program[0];
While testing this I noticed:
iptables -I OUTPUT -m bpf --bytecode \
'6,40 0 0 14, 21 0 3 2048,48 0 0 25,21 0 1 20,6 0 0 96,6 0 0 0' -j ACCEPT
Note that this works but it should not.
iptables -D OUTPUT -m bpf --bytecode \
'6,40 0 0 14, 21 0 3 2048,48 0 0 25,21 0 1 20,6 0 0 96,1 0 0 0' -j ACCEPT
^
Mind that 1, it's a different filter, but it deletes the previous
filter without problems here.
A quick look at make_delete_mask() in iptables tells me that the
changes you made to userspace to allow variable size matches are not
enough to generate a sane mask (which is fundamental while looking for
a matching rule during the deletion).
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
