Hi Shmulik,
On 10/09/2017 01:57 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 01:18:23PM +0200, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 01:40:13PM -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:02 PM, Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik@xxxxxxx> wrote:
From: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@xxxxxxxxx>
Commit 2c16d6033264 ("netfilter: xt_bpf: support ebpf") introduced
support for attaching an eBPF object by an fd, with the
'bpf_mt_check_v1' ABI expecting the '.fd' to be specified upon each
IPT_SO_SET_REPLACE call.
However this breaks subsequent iptables calls:
# iptables -A INPUT -m bpf --object-pinned /sys/fs/bpf/xxx -j ACCEPT
# iptables -A INPUT -s 5.6.7.8 -j ACCEPT
iptables: Invalid argument. Run `dmesg' for more information.
[...]
References: [1] https://marc.info/?l=netfilter-devel&m=150564724607440&w=2
[2] https://marc.info/?l=netfilter-devel&m=150575727129880&w=2
Cc: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reported-by: Rafael Buchbinder <rafi@xxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@xxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Applied, thanks.
Hm, I have to keep this back. Compilation breaks here.
net/netfilter/xt_bpf.c: In function ‘__bpf_mt_check_path’:
net/netfilter/xt_bpf.c:59:2: error: implicit declaration of function
‘bpf_obj_get_user’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
fd = bpf_obj_get_user(path);
^
Yeah, probably best to just add a dummy bpf_obj_get_user()
returning an error when CONFIG_BPF_SYSCALL is disabled.
--
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
