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: <20230417154737.12740-1-laoar.shao@gmail.com> <20230417154737.12740-6-laoar.shao@gmail.com>
 <20230417201457.c43xfcukjzm4u6vx@dhcp-172-26-102-232.dhcp.thefacebook.com> <CALOAHbC4Bz_VX52zmv=sScBf0hzscMAC4+EwMCpnd1BcaSVJSw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALOAHbC4Bz_VX52zmv=sScBf0hzscMAC4+EwMCpnd1BcaSVJSw@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Apr 2023 08:38:44 -0700
Message-ID: <CAADnVQJw9BCK2itE5bZWdQYz7D-8KdcH96E885zUakEDAOrC+Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 5/6] bpf: Improve tracing recursion prevention mechanism
To:     Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>
Cc:     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>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
        Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
        Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, linux-trace-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 6:49=E2=80=AFPM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2023 at 4:15=E2=80=AFAM Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 17, 2023 at 03:47:36PM +0000, Yafang Shao wrote:
> > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> > > index f61d513..3df39a5 100644
> > > --- a/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> > > +++ b/kernel/bpf/trampoline.c
> > > @@ -842,15 +842,21 @@ static __always_inline u64 notrace bpf_prog_sta=
rt_time(void)
> > >  static u64 notrace __bpf_prog_enter_recur(struct bpf_prog *prog, str=
uct bpf_tramp_run_ctx *run_ctx)
> > >       __acquires(RCU)
> > >  {
> > > -     rcu_read_lock();
> > > -     migrate_disable();
> > > -
> > > -     run_ctx->saved_run_ctx =3D bpf_set_run_ctx(&run_ctx->run_ctx);
> > > +     int bit;
> > >
> > > -     if (unlikely(this_cpu_inc_return(*(prog->active)) !=3D 1)) {
> > > +     rcu_read_lock();
> > > +     bit =3D test_recursion_try_acquire(_THIS_IP_, _RET_IP_);
> >
> > and bpf will prevent ftrace to run and vice versa.
> > Not a good idea.
> >
> > One bpf prog will prevent different bpf prog to run since they share cu=
rrent task.
> > Not a good idea either.
>
> That shouldn't happen. test_recursion_try_acquire() uses a
> per-task_struct value. One single task_struct can't run in parallel,
> right?
> Note that the bpf program running in softirq or irq context won't be
> prevented by it.
> IIUC, the bpf program should run in serial in one single task, right?
> That said, one bpf program can only run after another bpf program
> finished in the same task?

bpf progs can nest in the same task.