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: <20221014201427.2435461-1-void@manifault.com> <20221014201427.2435461-4-void@manifault.com>
 <CAP01T77PTK+bD2mBrxJShKNPhEypT2+nSHcr3=uuJbrghv_wFg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAP01T77PTK+bD2mBrxJShKNPhEypT2+nSHcr3=uuJbrghv_wFg@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Oct 2022 07:33:06 +0530
Message-ID: <CAP01T747PKC2jySOZCWu_gauHbBfaj4JE=hbtm4Z4C-Y8b3ZHg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] bpf/selftests: Add selftests for new task kfuncs
To:     David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
Cc:     bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net,
        andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org,
        yhs@fb.com, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org,
        sdf@google.com, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@fb.com, tj@kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 07:23, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 15 Oct 2022 at 01:45, David Vernet <void@manifault.com> wrote:
> >
> > A previous change added a series of kfuncs for storing struct
> > task_struct objects as referenced kptrs. This patch adds a new
> > task_kfunc test suite for validating their expected behavior.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com>
> > ---
> > [...]
> > +
> > +SEC("tp_btf/task_newtask")
> > +int BPF_PROG(task_kfunc_acquire_trusted_nested, struct task_struct *task, u64 clone_flags)
> > +{
> > +       struct task_struct *acquired;
> > +
> > +       if (!is_test_kfunc_task())
> > +               return 0;
> > +
> > +       /* Can't invoke bpf_task_acquire() on a trusted pointer at a nonzero offset. */
> > +       acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task->last_wakee);
>
> The comment is incorrect, that would be &task->last_wakee instead,
> this is PTR_TO_BTF_ID | PTR_NESTED.
>
> > +       if (!acquired)
> > +               return 0;
> > +       bpf_task_release(acquired);
> > +
> > +       return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > [...]
> > +
> > +static int test_acquire_release(struct task_struct *task)
> > +{
> > +       struct task_struct *acquired;
> > +
> > +       acquired = bpf_task_acquire(task);
>
> Unfortunately a side effect of this change is that now since
> PTR_TO_BTF_ID without ref_obj_id is considered trusted, the bpf_ct_*
> functions would begin working with tp_btf args. That probably needs to
> be fixed so that they reject them (ideally with a failing test case to
> make sure it doesn't resurface), probably with a new suffix __ref/or
> __owned as added here [0].
>
> Alexei, since you've suggested avoiding adding that suffix, do you see
> any other way out here?
> It's questionable whether bpf_ct_set_timeout/status should work for CT
> not owned by the BPF program.
>
>   [0]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/dfb859a6b76a9234baa194e795ae89cb7ca5694b.1662383493.git.lorenzo@kernel.org
>

Sorry for accidentally bumping this v3 thread instead of v5, whosoever
replies please continue there.