On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 5:14 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 2:17 AM Daniel Borkmann <dan...@iogearbox.net> wrote:
> > ("bpf: Replace cant_sleep() with cant_migrate()"). So perhaps one way to
> > catch
> > bugs for sleepable progs is to add a __might_sleep() into
> > __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable()
>
> that's a good idea.
>
> > in order to trigger the assertion generally for DEBUG_ATOMIC_SLEEP
> > configured
> > kernels when we're in non-sleepable sections? Still not perfect since the
> > code
> > needs to be exercised first but better than nothing at all.
> >
> > >> What about others like security_sock_rcv_skb() for example which could be
> > >> bh_lock_sock()'ed (or, generally hooks running in softirq context)?
> > >
> > > ahh. it's in running in bh at that point? then it should be added to
> > > blacklist.
> >
> > Yep.
>
> I'm assuming KP will take care of it soon.
I found one other hook, file_send_sigiotask, which mentions
"Note that this hook is sometimes called from interrupt." So I think
we should add it to the list as well.
Given some more due diligence done here
and Daniel's proposal of adding __might_sleep() to
the __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable() we should be able to
iterate on finding other non-sleepable hooks (if they exist)
and eventually augmenting the LSM_HOOK macro for a
more structured way to store this information.
- KP
> If not I'll come back to this set some time in August.
>
> In the meantime I've pushed patch 1 that removes redundant sync_rcu to
> bpf-next,
> since it's independent and it benefits from being in the tree as much
> as possible.
