Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:18 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220421140740.459558-1-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
 <20220426040314.ez3cdpv2w45vbgkk@MBP-98dd607d3435.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
 <CAO-hwJLziatB9n5Rut_EYRgfN94t2XX8Zx8B_Zmu2nucTw3k8g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQKN==eb3ASQhrJBg4yC8BuRdMQyY-OdRbXhdyv2P8L0-A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO-hwJ+HV=jZUgH1LXcPuBFirMzx3OAdSy4zvyyYh7PQhnaduQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220512042327.vla3j7rjqrmjporp@MBP-98dd607d3435.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <CAO-hwJLXM6Zf46_PweJ=QTiacX0+siUYkyqPu1hRrx_8fDVUTQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO-hwJLXM6Zf46_PweJ=QTiacX0+siUYkyqPu1hRrx_8fDVUTQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 13 May 2022 12:42:57 -0700
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+BLhpM-VZZ27XJGqqnm2uVTHzDqwtwp-w8U=m7zRqF+w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v4 0/7] Introduce eBPF support for HID devices (new attempt)
To:     Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
Cc:     Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
        Jiri Kosina <jikos@kernel.org>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
        Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
        KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
        Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@linux.intel.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:02 AM Benjamin Tissoires
<benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 6:23 AM Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2022 at 09:12:09AM +0200, Benjamin Tissoires wrote:
> > >
> > > Also, I wonder if we should not have some way to namespace kfuncs.
> > > Ideally, I would like to prevent the usage of those kfuncs outside of
> > > some helpers that I define in HID so I don't have to worry too much
> > > about other trace programs fuzzing and segfaulting the kernel.
> >
> > That would be a great feature to have. Other folks expressed the same interest.
> > Just grouping them by prog type is not flexible enough.
> > It feels kfuncs could be scoped by (prog_type, attach_btf_id or attach_hook) pair.
> > What are your thoughts?
> >
>
> Scoping by attach_btf_id is very appealing to me (attach_hook less TBH):
> I have internal functions I do not want normal users to use, and also
> it would also restrict who can call what in the more general case.
>
> However, I don't think I'll put that effort in v5. It is a nice to
> have feature IMO, but not really required ATM.

Great. Looking forward to it.