Hey everyone,I've been trying to implement IPv6 support into an XDP Firewall which can be found below.
https://github.com/gamemann/XDP-FirewallUnfortunately, I've been fighting with the BPF verifier and I'm exceeding the BPF stack size of 512 bytes. I linked the above in the case others want to see the headers that define things like `MAX_FILTERS` inside the XDP program. The error I am receiving is:
```error: <unknown>:0:0: in function xdp_prog_main i32 (%struct.xdp_md*): Looks like the BPF stack limit of 512 bytes is exceeded. Please move large on stack variables into BPF per-cpu array map.
```Which spams anywhere from 3 - 10 times depending on what I try to resolve the issue.
I ended up re-writing the entire program trying to use as little variables as possible and I got very close to getting the program to compile until I added support for the ICMPv6 protocol (once I remove this, it compiles and runs without any issues). I'm at a loss on what I can do now, though.
The current XDP program code is the following. https://gist.github.com/gamemann/a0acd9603405c3d7b3c792b5429ced38From what the error states, I could try storing variables into a per-CPU BPF map. Therefore, I tried storing the ICMP (and at one point TCP) information into a BPF map and used the data later on which can be found below.
https://gist.github.com/gamemann/663674924e16286b02a835637912c2a5This still exceeded the BPF stack size. With that said, I'd assume performance would be heavily impacted if we stored everything inside a BPF map. To my understanding, per-CPU maps cannot be reliably read within the XDP program. Therefore, if this would have worked, I'd probably want to use a regular non per-CPU map anyways which would impact performance.
I also tried BPF calls without luck and was thinking about trying BPF tail calls. Though, I don't think this would help. BPF tail calls use the same BPF stack to my understanding.
I could try adding even more variables inside the program to a BPF map such as the PPS and BPS variables. However, I wanted to see if there were any other suggestions from the mailing list on this. I plan to write another firewall that'll have a lot more functionality than this firewall in XDP and I'm worried I'd run into similar issues there.
Any help would be highly appreciated and thank you for your time!