Thread (120 messages) flat view 120 messages, 12 authors, 2020-05-13

Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] xdp: Support specifying expected existing program when attaching XDP

From: Alexei Starovoitov <hidden>
Date: 2020-03-26 19:59:05
Also in: bpf

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 01:35:13PM +0100, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
Additionally, in the case where there is *not* a central management
daemon (i.e., what I'm implementing with libxdp), this would be the flow
implemented by the library without bpf_link:

1. Query kernel for current BPF prog loaded on $IFACE
2. Sanity-check that this program is a dispatcher program installed by
   libxdp
3. Create a new dispatcher program with whatever changes we want to do
   (such as adding another component program).
4. Atomically replace the old program with the new one using the netlink
   API in this patch series.
in this model what stops another application that is not using libdispatcher to
nuke dispatcher program ?
Whereas with bpf_link, it would be:

1. Find the pinned bpf_link for $IFACE (e.g., load from
   /sys/fs/bpf/iface-links/$IFNAME).
2. Query kernel for current BPF prog linked to $LINK
3. Sanity-check that this program is a dispatcher program installed by
   libxdp
4. Create a new dispatcher program with whatever changes we want to do
   (such as adding another component program).
5. Atomically replace the old program with the new one using the
   LINK_UPDATE bpf() API.
whereas here dispatcher program is only accessible to libdispatcher.
Instance of bpffs needs to be known to libdispatcher only.
That's the ownership I've been talking about.

As discussed early we need a way for _human_ to nuke dispatcher program,
but such api shouldn't be usable out of application/task.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help