Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-12-01 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 09:35:29 +0200 Ido Schimmel wrote: > > Looking at the patch from Marco to move back to a field now I'm > > wondering how you run into this, Ido :D > > > > AFAIU the extension is only added if process as a KCOV handle. > > > > Are you using KCOV? > > Hi Jakub, > > Yes. We

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-30 Thread Ido Schimmel
On Mon, Nov 30, 2020 at 05:52:48PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:09:41 +0200 Ido Schimmel wrote: > > + Florian > > > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: > > > From: Aleksandr Nogikh > > > > > > Remote KCOV coverage collection enables

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-30 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 18:09:41 +0200 Ido Schimmel wrote: > + Florian > > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: > > From: Aleksandr Nogikh > > > > Remote KCOV coverage collection enables coverage-guided fuzzing of the > > code that is not reachable during normal system

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-25 Thread Marco Elver
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 at 22:02, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:58:37 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 12:55 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > > It is more complicated. We can go back to an skb field if this work is > > > expected to yield results for mac80211.

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 21:58:37 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 12:55 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > It is more complicated. We can go back to an skb field if this work is > > expected to yield results for mac80211. Would you mind sending a patch? > > I can do that, but I'm

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Johannes Berg
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 12:55 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > [snip] > Ack, you have to figure out all the places anyway, the question is > whether you put probes there or calls in the source code. > > Shifting the maintenance burden but also BPF is flexibility. Yeah, true. Though I'd argue also

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 20:30:44 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 10:35 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 19:12:21 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > > So I'm leaning towards reverting the whole thing. You can attach > > > > kretprobes and record the information

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Johannes Berg
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 10:35 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 19:12:21 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > > > So I'm leaning towards reverting the whole thing. You can attach > > > kretprobes and record the information you need in BPF maps. > > > > I'm not going to object to

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 19:12:21 +0100 Johannes Berg wrote: > > So I'm leaning towards reverting the whole thing. You can attach > > kretprobes and record the information you need in BPF maps. > > I'm not going to object to reverting it (and perhaps redoing it better > later), but I will point out

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Johannes Berg
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 10:06 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:52:27 +0100 Florian Westphal wrote: > > Ido Schimmel wrote: > > > Other suggestions? > > > > Aleksandr, why was this made into an skb extension in the first place? > > > > AFAIU this feature is usually always

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Jakub Kicinski
On Sat, 21 Nov 2020 17:52:27 +0100 Florian Westphal wrote: > Ido Schimmel wrote: > > Other suggestions? > > Aleksandr, why was this made into an skb extension in the first place? > > AFAIU this feature is usually always disabled at build time. > For debug builds (test farm /debug kernel etc)

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Johannes Berg
On Sat, 2020-11-21 at 17:52 +0100, Florian Westphal wrote: > > Aleksandr, why was this made into an skb extension in the first place? > > AFAIU this feature is usually always disabled at build time. > For debug builds (test farm /debug kernel etc) its always needed. > > If thats the case this

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Florian Westphal
Ido Schimmel wrote: > On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: > > From: Aleksandr Nogikh > > > > Remote KCOV coverage collection enables coverage-guided fuzzing of the > > code that is not reachable during normal system call execution. It is > > especially helpful for

Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-11-21 Thread Ido Schimmel
+ Florian On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 05:36:19PM +, Aleksandr Nogikh wrote: > From: Aleksandr Nogikh > > Remote KCOV coverage collection enables coverage-guided fuzzing of the > code that is not reachable during normal system call execution. It is > especially helpful for fuzzing networking

[PATCH v5 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions

2020-10-29 Thread Aleksandr Nogikh
From: Aleksandr Nogikh Remote KCOV coverage collection enables coverage-guided fuzzing of the code that is not reachable during normal system call execution. It is especially helpful for fuzzing networking subsystems, where it is common to perform packet handling in separate work queues even for