Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.34 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.34;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1702467945-38866-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
 <1702467945-38866-2-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <20231213222415.GA13818@breakpoint.cc>
In-Reply-To: <20231213222415.GA13818@breakpoint.cc>
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 13 Dec 2023 19:25:01 -0800
Message-ID: <CAADnVQKGnkXYZ4GMpmDHhp2W5c0kJ7p-ipr3JwKSZyKvaSfyiQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC nf-next 1/2] netfilter: bpf: support prog update
To:     Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>
Cc:     "D. Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>,
        Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>,
        Jozsef Kadlecsik <kadlec@netfilter.org>,
        bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        coreteam@netfilter.org,
        netfilter-devel <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 2:24=E2=80=AFPM Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de> wro=
te:
>
> D. Wythe <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> > From: "D. Wythe" <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
> >
> > To support the prog update, we need to ensure that the prog seen
> > within the hook is always valid. Considering that hooks are always
> > protected by rcu_read_lock(), which provide us the ability to use a
> > new RCU-protected context to access the prog.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: D. Wythe <alibuda@linux.alibaba.com>
> > ---
> >  net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c | 124 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
+++-----
> >  1 file changed, 111 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c b/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c
> > index e502ec0..918c470 100644
> > --- a/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c
> > +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.c
> > @@ -8,17 +8,11 @@
> >  #include <net/netfilter/nf_bpf_link.h>
> >  #include <uapi/linux/netfilter_ipv4.h>
> >
> > -static unsigned int nf_hook_run_bpf(void *bpf_prog, struct sk_buff *sk=
b,
> > -                                 const struct nf_hook_state *s)
> > +struct bpf_nf_hook_ctx
> >  {
> > -     const struct bpf_prog *prog =3D bpf_prog;
> > -     struct bpf_nf_ctx ctx =3D {
> > -             .state =3D s,
> > -             .skb =3D skb,
> > -     };
> > -
> > -     return bpf_prog_run(prog, &ctx);
> > -}
> > +     struct bpf_prog *prog;
> > +     struct rcu_head rcu;
> > +};
>
> I don't understand the need for this structure.  AFAICS bpf_prog_put()
> will always release the program via call_rcu()?
>
> If it doesn't, we are probably already in trouble as-is without this
> patch, I don't think anything that prevents us from ending up calling alr=
eady
> released bpf prog, or releasing it while another cpu is still running it
> if bpf_prog_put releases the actual underlying prog instantly.
>
> A BPF expert could confirm bpf-prog-put-is-call-rcu.

+1
These patches look unnecessary.
It seems that they accidently fix something else.