On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 10:39:57AM -0700, Joel Fernandes wrote: > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 7:31 PM, Alexei Starovoitov > <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 12, 2018 at 03:54:27AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote: > >> The map-in-map frequently serves as a mechanism for atomic > >> snapshotting of state that a BPF program might record. The current > >> implementation is dangerous to use in this way, however, since > >> userspace has no way of knowing when all programs that might have > >> retrieved the "old" value of the map may have completed. > >> > >> This change ensures that map update operations on map-in-map map types > >> always wait for all references to the old map to drop before returning > >> to userspace. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Daniel Colascione <dancol@xxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > >> kernel/bpf/syscall.c | 14 ++++++++++++++ > >> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) > >> > >> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > >> index 8339d81cba1d..d7c16ae1e85a 100644 > >> --- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > >> +++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c > >> @@ -741,6 +741,18 @@ static int map_lookup_elem(union bpf_attr *attr) > >> return err; > >> } > >> > >> +static void maybe_wait_bpf_programs(struct bpf_map *map) > >> +{ > >> + /* Wait for any running BPF programs to complete so that > >> + * userspace, when we return to it, knows that all programs > >> + * that could be running use the new map value. > >> + */ > >> + if (map->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_HASH_OF_MAPS || > >> + map->map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_ARRAY_OF_MAPS) { > >> + synchronize_rcu(); > >> + } > > > > extra {} were not necessary. I removed them while applying to bpf-next. > > Please run checkpatch.pl next time. > > Thanks > > Thanks Alexei for taking it. Me and Lorenzo were discussing that not > having this causes incorrect behavior for apps using map-in-map for > this. So I CC'd stable as well. It is too late in the release cycle. We can submit it to stable releases after the merge window.