Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220824134055.1328882-1-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
 <20220824134055.1328882-2-benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> <CAADnVQKgkFpLh_URJn6qCiAONteA1dwZHd6=4cZn15g1JCAPag@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAP01T75ec_T0M6DU=JE2tfNsWRZuPSMu_7JHA7ZoOBw5eDh1Bg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO-hwJLd9wXx+ppccBYPKZDymO0sk++Nt2E3-R97PY7LbfJfTg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQK8dS+2KbWsqktvxoNKhHtdD5UPiaWVfNu=ESdn_OHpgQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO-hwJK9uHTWCg3_6jrPF6UKiamkNfj=cuH5mHauoLX+0udV9w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAADnVQLuL045Sxdvh8kfcNkmD55+Wz8fHU3RtH+oQyOgePU5Pw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO-hwJJJJRtoq2uTXRKCck6QSH8SFDSTpHmvTyOieczY7bdm8g@mail.gmail.com> <CAP01T77SJyiDxv0A++_mNw7JZ-Mzh4B1FAM6zLiP6n75MNY0uQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP01T77SJyiDxv0A++_mNw7JZ-Mzh4B1FAM6zLiP6n75MNY0uQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Benjamin Tissoires <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>
Date:   Fri, 2 Sep 2022 15:11:38 +0200
Message-ID: <CAO-hwJLbbB0Abw3d4pJPnYTAzQNdtgBTpuNz4zVUTFXCbZEEbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v9 01/23] bpf/verifier: allow all functions to
 read user provided context
To:     Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
        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>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
        Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>,
        Joe Stringer <joe@cilium.io>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Tero Kristo <tero.kristo@linux.intel.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:HID CORE LAYER" <linux-input@vger.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK" 
        <linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
        "open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 2, 2022 at 5:50 AM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 1 Sept 2022 at 18:48, Benjamin Tissoires
> <benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> > If the above is correct, then yes, it would make sense to me to have 2
> > distinct functions: one to check for the args types only (does the
> > function definition in the problem matches BTF), and one to check for
> > its use.
> > Behind the scenes, btf_check_subprog_arg_match() calls
> > btf_check_func_arg_match() which is the one function with entangled
> > arguments type checking and actually assessing that the values
> > provided are correct.
> >
> > I can try to split that  btf_check_func_arg_match() into 2 distinct
> > functions, though I am not sure I'll get it right.
>
> FYI, I've already split them into separate functions in my tree
> because it had become super ugly at this point with all the new
> support and I refactored it to add the linked list helpers support
> using kfuncs (which requires some special handling for the args), so I
> think you can just leave it with a "processing_call" check in for your
> series for now.
>

great, thanks a lot.
Actually, writing the patch today with the "processing_call" was
really easy now that I have turned the problem in my head a lot
yesterday.

I am about to send v10 with the reviews addressed.

Cheers,
Benjamin