Re: [PATCH bpf-next 5/8] bpf: Allow selecting reuseport socket from a SOCKMAP
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Date: 2019-11-25 04:17:23
Also in:
bpf
Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019 at 12:07:48PM +0100, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:quoted
SOCKMAP now supports storing references to listening sockets. Nothing keeps us from using it as an array of sockets to select from in SK_REUSEPORT programs. Whitelist the map type with the BPF helper for selecting socket. However, impose a restriction that the selected socket needs to be a listening TCP socket or a bound UDP socket (connected or not). The only other map type that works with the BPF reuseport helper, REUSEPORT_SOCKARRAY, has a corresponding check in its update operation handler. Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com> ---
[...]
quoted
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c index 49ded4a7588a..e3fb77353248 100644 --- a/net/core/filter.c +++ b/net/core/filter.c@@ -8723,6 +8723,8 @@ BPF_CALL_4(sk_select_reuseport, struct sk_reuseport_kern *, reuse_kern, selected_sk = map->ops->map_lookup_elem(map, key); if (!selected_sk) return -ENOENT; + if (!sock_flag(selected_sk, SOCK_RCU_FREE)) + return -EINVAL;hmm. I wonder whether this breaks existing users...
There is already this check in reuseport_array_update_check() /* * sk must be hashed (i.e. listening in the TCP case or binded * in the UDP case) and * it must also be a SO_REUSEPORT sk (i.e. reuse cannot be NULL). * * Also, sk will be used in bpf helper that is protected by * rcu_read_lock(). */ if (!sock_flag(nsk, SOCK_RCU_FREE) || !sk_hashed(nsk) || !nsk_reuse) return -EINVAL; So I believe it should not cause any problems with existing users. Perhaps we could consolidate the checks a bit or move it into the update paths if we wanted. I assume Jakub was just ensuring we don't get here with SOCK_RCU_FREE set from any of the new paths now. I'll let him answer though.
Martin, what do you think?
More eyes the better.
Could you also take a look at other patches too? In particular patch 7?
Agreed would be good to give 7/8 a look I'm not too familiar with the selftests there.