Skip to content

K
Kernel

openeuler / Kernel
大约 2 年 前同步成功

通知 8
Star 0
Fork 0
K
Kernel
切换分支/标签
  1. 11 10月, 2022 4 次提交
  3. 30 7月, 2022 1 次提交
  5. 30 6月, 2022 1 次提交
  7. 29 6月, 2022 1 次提交
  9. 20 5月, 2022 1 次提交
  11. 13 5月, 2022 1 次提交
    • A
      libbpf: Add safer high-level wrappers for map operations · 737d0646
      由 Andrii Nakryiko 提交于 
      Add high-level API wrappers for most common and typical BPF map
operations that works directly on instances of struct bpf_map * (so
you don't have to call bpf_map__fd()) and validate key/value size
expectations.

These helpers require users to specify key (and value, where
appropriate) sizes when performing lookup/update/delete/etc. This forces
user to actually think and validate (for themselves) those. This is
a good thing as user is expected by kernel to implicitly provide correct
key/value buffer sizes and kernel will just read/write necessary amount
of data. If it so happens that user doesn't set up buffers correctly
(which bit people for per-CPU maps especially) kernel either randomly
overwrites stack data or return -EFAULT, depending on user's luck and
circumstances. These high-level APIs are meant to prevent such
unpleasant and hard to debug bugs.

This patch also adds bpf_map_delete_elem_flags() low-level API and
requires passing flags to bpf_map__delete_elem() API for consistency
across all similar APIs, even though currently kernel doesn't expect
any extra flags for BPF_MAP_DELETE_ELEM operation.

List of map operations that get these high-level APIs:

  - bpf_map_lookup_elem;
  - bpf_map_update_elem;
  - bpf_map_delete_elem;
  - bpf_map_lookup_and_delete_elem;
  - bpf_map_get_next_key.
Signed-off-by: NAndrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220512220713.2617964-1-andrii@kernel.org
      737d0646
  13. 11 5月, 2022 1 次提交
  15. 18 3月, 2022 1 次提交
  17. 10 3月, 2022 1 次提交
  19. 03 2月, 2022 1 次提交
  21. 13 1月, 2022 1 次提交
  23. 07 1月, 2022 1 次提交
  25. 15 12月, 2021 1 次提交
    • A
      libbpf: Auto-bump RLIMIT_MEMLOCK if kernel needs it for BPF · e542f2c4
      由 Andrii Nakryiko 提交于 
      The need to increase RLIMIT_MEMLOCK to do anything useful with BPF is
one of the first extremely frustrating gotchas that all new BPF users go
through and in some cases have to learn it a very hard way.

Luckily, starting with upstream Linux kernel version 5.11, BPF subsystem
dropped the dependency on memlock and uses memcg-based memory accounting
instead. Unfortunately, detecting memcg-based BPF memory accounting is
far from trivial (as can be evidenced by this patch), so in practice
most BPF applications still do unconditional RLIMIT_MEMLOCK increase.

As we move towards libbpf 1.0, it would be good to allow users to forget
about RLIMIT_MEMLOCK vs memcg and let libbpf do the sensible adjustment
automatically. This patch paves the way forward in this matter. Libbpf
will do feature detection of memcg-based accounting, and if detected,
will do nothing. But if the kernel is too old, just like BCC, libbpf
will automatically increase RLIMIT_MEMLOCK on behalf of user
application ([0]).

As this is technically a breaking change, during the transition period
applications have to opt into libbpf 1.0 mode by setting
LIBBPF_STRICT_AUTO_RLIMIT_MEMLOCK bit when calling
libbpf_set_strict_mode().

Libbpf allows to control the exact amount of set RLIMIT_MEMLOCK limit
with libbpf_set_memlock_rlim_max() API. Passing 0 will make libbpf do
nothing with RLIMIT_MEMLOCK. libbpf_set_memlock_rlim_max() has to be
called before the first bpf_prog_load(), bpf_btf_load(), or
bpf_object__load() call, otherwise it has no effect and will return
-EBUSY.

  [0] Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/issues/369Signed-off-by: NAndrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NDaniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211214195904.1785155-2-andrii@kernel.org
      e542f2c4
  27. 11 12月, 2021 2 次提交
  29. 03 12月, 2021 1 次提交
  31. 26 11月, 2021 1 次提交
  33. 08 11月, 2021 2 次提交
    • A
      libbpf: Unify low-level BPF_PROG_LOAD APIs into bpf_prog_load() · d10ef2b8
      由 Andrii Nakryiko 提交于 
      Add a new unified OPTS-based low-level API for program loading,
bpf_prog_load() ([0]).  bpf_prog_load() accepts few "mandatory"
parameters as input arguments (program type, name, license,
instructions) and all the other optional (as in not required to specify
for all types of BPF programs) fields into struct bpf_prog_load_opts.

This makes all the other non-extensible APIs variant for BPF_PROG_LOAD
obsolete and they are slated for deprecation in libbpf v0.7:
  - bpf_load_program();
  - bpf_load_program_xattr();
  - bpf_verify_program().

Implementation-wise, internal helper libbpf__bpf_prog_load is refactored
to become a public bpf_prog_load() API. struct bpf_prog_load_params used
internally is replaced by public struct bpf_prog_load_opts.

Unfortunately, while conceptually all this is pretty straightforward,
the biggest complication comes from the already existing bpf_prog_load()
*high-level* API, which has nothing to do with BPF_PROG_LOAD command.

We try really hard to have a new API named bpf_prog_load(), though,
because it maps naturally to BPF_PROG_LOAD command.

For that, we rename old bpf_prog_load() into bpf_prog_load_deprecated()
and mark it as COMPAT_VERSION() for shared library users compiled
against old version of libbpf. Statically linked users and shared lib
users compiled against new version of libbpf headers will get "rerouted"
to bpf_prog_deprecated() through a macro helper that decides whether to
use new or old bpf_prog_load() based on number of input arguments (see
___libbpf_overload in libbpf_common.h).

To test that existing
bpf_prog_load()-using code compiles and works as expected, I've compiled
and ran selftests as is. I had to remove (locally) selftest/bpf/Makefile
-Dbpf_prog_load=bpf_prog_test_load hack because it was conflicting with
the macro-based overload approach. I don't expect anyone else to do
something like this in practice, though. This is testing-specific way to
replace bpf_prog_load() calls with special testing variant of it, which
adds extra prog_flags value. After testing I kept this selftests hack,
but ensured that we use a new bpf_prog_load_deprecated name for this.

This patch also marks bpf_prog_load() and bpf_prog_load_xattr() as deprecated.
bpf_object interface has to be used for working with struct bpf_program.
Libbpf doesn't support loading just a bpf_program.

The silver lining is that when we get to libbpf 1.0 all these
complication will be gone and we'll have one clean bpf_prog_load()
low-level API with no backwards compatibility hackery surrounding it.

  [0] Closes: https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf/issues/284Signed-off-by: NAndrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211103220845.2676888-4-andrii@kernel.org
      d10ef2b8
    • A
      libbpf: Rename DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS into LIBBPF_OPTS · be80e9cd
      由 Andrii Nakryiko 提交于 
      It's confusing that libbpf-provided helper macro doesn't start with
LIBBPF. Also "declare" vs "define" is confusing terminology, I can never
remember and always have to look up previous examples.

Bypass both issues by renaming DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS into a short and
clean LIBBPF_OPTS. To avoid breaking existing code, provide:

  #define DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS LIBBPF_OPTS

in libbpf_legacy.h. We can decide later if we ever want to remove it or
we'll keep it forever because it doesn't add any maintainability burden.
Signed-off-by: NAndrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: NDave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211103220845.2676888-2-andrii@kernel.org
      be80e9cd
  35. 17 8月, 2021 1 次提交
  37. 25 5月, 2021 1 次提交
  39. 30 9月, 2020 1 次提交
  41. 29 9月, 2020 2 次提交
  43. 16 9月, 2020 1 次提交
  45. 07 8月, 2020 1 次提交
  47. 02 8月, 2020 1 次提交
  49. 26 7月, 2020 1 次提交
  51. 23 6月, 2020 1 次提交
  53. 10 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  55. 02 5月, 2020 1 次提交
  57. 29 4月, 2020 1 次提交
  59. 31 3月, 2020 1 次提交
  61. 16 1月, 2020 1 次提交
  63. 10 1月, 2020 1 次提交
    • M
      bpf: libbpf: Add STRUCT_OPS support · 590a0088
      由 Martin KaFai Lau 提交于 
      This patch adds BPF STRUCT_OPS support to libbpf.

The only sec_name convention is SEC(".struct_ops") to identify the
struct_ops implemented in BPF,
e.g. To implement a tcp_congestion_ops:

SEC(".struct_ops")
struct tcp_congestion_ops dctcp = {
	.init           = (void *)dctcp_init,  /* <-- a bpf_prog */
	/* ... some more func prts ... */
	.name           = "bpf_dctcp",
};

Each struct_ops is defined as a global variable under SEC(".struct_ops")
as above.  libbpf creates a map for each variable and the variable name
is the map's name.  Multiple struct_ops is supported under
SEC(".struct_ops").

In the bpf_object__open phase, libbpf will look for the SEC(".struct_ops")
section and find out what is the btf-type the struct_ops is
implementing.  Note that the btf-type here is referring to
a type in the bpf_prog.o's btf.  A "struct bpf_map" is added
by bpf_object__add_map() as other maps do.  It will then
collect (through SHT_REL) where are the bpf progs that the
func ptrs are referring to.  No btf_vmlinux is needed in
the open phase.

In the bpf_object__load phase, the map-fields, which depend
on the btf_vmlinux, are initialized (in bpf_map__init_kern_struct_ops()).
It will also set the prog->type, prog->attach_btf_id, and
prog->expected_attach_type.  Thus, the prog's properties do
not rely on its section name.
[ Currently, the bpf_prog's btf-type ==> btf_vmlinux's btf-type matching
  process is as simple as: member-name match + btf-kind match + size match.
  If these matching conditions fail, libbpf will reject.
  The current targeting support is "struct tcp_congestion_ops" which
  most of its members are function pointers.
  The member ordering of the bpf_prog's btf-type can be different from
  the btf_vmlinux's btf-type. ]

Then, all obj->maps are created as usual (in bpf_object__create_maps()).

Once the maps are created and prog's properties are all set,
the libbpf will proceed to load all the progs.

bpf_map__attach_struct_ops() is added to register a struct_ops
map to a kernel subsystem.
Signed-off-by: NMartin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200109003514.3856730-1-kafai@fb.com
      590a0088
  65. 20 12月, 2019 1 次提交
    • A
      libbpf: Introduce bpf_prog_attach_xattr · cdbee383
      由 Andrey Ignatov 提交于 
      Introduce a new bpf_prog_attach_xattr function that, in addition to
program fd, target fd and attach type, accepts an extendable struct
bpf_prog_attach_opts.

bpf_prog_attach_opts relies on DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS macro to maintain
backward and forward compatibility and has the following "optional"
attach attributes:

* existing attach_flags, since it's not required when attaching in NONE
  mode. Even though it's quite often used in MULTI and OVERRIDE mode it
  seems to be a good idea to reduce number of arguments to
  bpf_prog_attach_xattr;

* newly introduced attribute of BPF_PROG_ATTACH command: replace_prog_fd
  that is fd of previously attached cgroup-bpf program to replace if
  BPF_F_REPLACE flag is used.

The new function is named to be consistent with other xattr-functions
(bpf_prog_test_run_xattr, bpf_create_map_xattr, bpf_load_program_xattr).

The struct bpf_prog_attach_opts is supposed to be used with
DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS macro.
Signed-off-by: NAndrey Ignatov <rdna@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: NAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Acked-by: NAndrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/bd6e0732303eb14e4b79cb128268d9e9ad6db208.1576741281.git.rdna@fb.com
      cdbee383
  67. 16 12月, 2019 1 次提交