From nobody Wed Nov 27 18:41:23 2024 Received: from out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com (out30-132.freemail.mail.aliyun.com [115.124.30.132]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28A921EF94F; Tue, 8 Oct 2024 08:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.132 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728374969; cv=none; b=ff62gyhWqoaNztou3ELv48Z+A9adViZizBECmjrQtKKkm3i+gu8kG0eYyOaYlrmkdkSQzcPbLEVdrb4FoSuuwfh5Km+GynfQxh5ULTHVu71hUSCnoEmjweTCwBsjWpVulbbPiM6O4NvAxmNVNi4NvehZrlWkswx2dllJSMf4Oyw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728374969; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8TWrMAqz+8PV+QIuzBMLugBELPe9nkZP3HMj0ti5P9Q=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; b=f6zhlpeK42xPjHmZ51dvvGyXAMQVs8QHqXSpggpGZqBSt1NKMG4AUM7e653OSUuZr59wH7Ash78Ys1EY9plPf3aL/gWVC2CPlPauSLwCYhwNBBVM0/F8tmv7lMlRdLsMWnsUEHMQMwT8LPBs2snsxIA1//WAeXrv2Pr/EP1rWz4= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b=wcslBufv; arc=none smtp.client-ip=115.124.30.132 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.alibaba.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.alibaba.com header.i=@linux.alibaba.com header.b="wcslBufv" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.alibaba.com; s=default; t=1728374958; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version; bh=4wuyDbSs+jQNbrvshTJAPkFNX8Ga8obk7ExF2kgCdfQ=; b=wcslBufvmRepU86iHhX/TEHpV3BGjTzDKeU4EbrLOdYGUQbtzz5Z27p9QzF/xxRCtQOZG9PBK4m0GX9+aUoORKRynhWJHkcwbdyMiBr21K/YP9qNf8AjrhXPhzrPdHLT4Jy+HoKTvTIOfiBgCSXEGhY7K6so3L4XhiyzMpk/exQ= Received: from localhost(mailfrom:lulie@linux.alibaba.com fp:SMTPD_---0WGcMLEf_1728374956) by smtp.aliyun-inc.com; Tue, 08 Oct 2024 16:09:17 +0800 From: Philo Lu To: bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Add rcu ptr in btf_id_sock_common_types Date: Tue, 8 Oct 2024 16:09:16 +0800 Message-Id: <20241008080916.44724-1-lulie@linux.alibaba.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.32.0.3.g01195cf9f Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Sometimes sk is dereferenced as an rcu ptr, such as skb->sk in tp_btf, which is a valid type of sock common. Then helpers like bpf_skc_to_*() can be used with skb->sk. For example, the following prog will be rejected without this patch: ``` SEC("tp_btf/tcp_bad_csum") int BPF_PROG(tcp_bad_csum, struct sk_buff* skb) { struct sock *sk =3D skb->sk; struct tcp_sock *tp; if (!sk) return 0; tp =3D bpf_skc_to_tcp_sock(sk); return 0; } ``` Signed-off-by: Philo Lu --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 9a7ed527e47e..3e7ce448ae03 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -8362,6 +8362,7 @@ static const struct bpf_reg_types btf_id_sock_common_= types =3D { PTR_TO_XDP_SOCK, PTR_TO_BTF_ID, PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_TRUSTED, + PTR_TO_BTF_ID | MEM_RCU, }, .btf_id =3D &btf_sock_ids[BTF_SOCK_TYPE_SOCK_COMMON], }; --=20 2.32.0.3.g01195cf9f