Add bpf_for_each(), bpf_for(), and bpf_repeat() macros that make writing
open-coded iterator-based loops much more convenient and natural. These
macros utilize cleanup attribute to ensure proper destruction of the
iterator and thanks to that manage to provide the ergonomics that is
very close to C language's for() construct. Typical loop would look like:
int i;
int arr[N];
bpf_for(i, 0, N) {
/* verifier will know that i >= 0 && i < N, so could be used to
* directly access array elements with no extra checks
*/
arr[i] = i;
}
bpf_repeat() is very similar, but it doesn't expose iteration number and
is meant as a simple "repeat action N times" loop:
bpf_repeat(N) { /* whatever, N times */ }
Note that `break` and `continue` statements inside the {} block work as
expected.
bpf_for_each() is a generalization over any kind of BPF open-coded
iterator allowing to use for-each-like approach instead of calling
low-level bpf_iter_<type>_{new,next,destroy}() APIs explicitly. E.g.:
struct cgroup *cg;
bpf_for_each(cgroup, cg, some, input, args) {
/* do something with each cg */
}
would call (not-yet-implemented) bpf_iter_cgroup_{new,next,destroy}()
functions to form a loop over cgroups, where `some, input, args` are
passed verbatim into constructor as
bpf_iter_cgroup_new(&it, some, input, args).
As a first demonstration, add pyperf variant based on the bpf_for() loop.
Also clean up a few tests that either included bpf_misc.h header
unnecessarily from the user-space, which is unsupported, or included it
before any common types are defined (and thus leading to unnecessary
compilation warnings, potentially).
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230308184121.1165081-6-andrii@kernel.org
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use syscall macros to access the setdomainname() arguments; currently
the code uses gprs[2] instead of orig_gpr2 for the first argument.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230128000650.1516334-16-iii@linux.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Use SYS_PREFIX macro from bpf_misc.h instead of hard-coded '__x64_'
prefix for sys_setdomainname attach point in lsm test.
Signed-off-by: Artem Savkov <asavkov@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220816055231.717006-1-asavkov@redhat.com
Add a basic test for map-in-map and per-cpu maps in sleepable programs.
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Acked-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210210033634.62081-10-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
Technically the bpf programs can sleep while attached to bpf_lsm_file_mprotect,
but such programs need to access user memory. So they're in might_fault()
category. Which means they cannot be called from file_mprotect lsm hook that
takes write lock on mm->mmap_lock.
Adjust the test accordingly.
Also add might_fault() to __bpf_prog_enter_sleepable() to catch such deadlocks early.
Fixes: 1e6c62a882 ("bpf: Introduce sleepable BPF programs")
Fixes: e68a144547 ("selftests/bpf: Add sleepable tests")
Reported-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200831201651.82447-1-alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com
The test was previously using an mprotect on the heap memory allocated
using malloc and was expecting the allocation to be always using
sbrk(2). This is, however, not always true and in certain conditions
malloc may end up using anonymous mmaps for heap alloctions. This means
that the following condition that is used in the "lsm/file_mprotect"
program is not sufficent to detect all mprotect calls done on heap
memory:
is_heap = (vma->vm_start >= vma->vm_mm->start_brk &&
vma->vm_end <= vma->vm_mm->brk);
The test is updated to use an mprotect on memory allocated on the stack.
While this would result in the splitting of the vma, this happens only
after the security_file_mprotect hook. So, the condition used in the BPF
program holds true.
Fixes: 03e54f100d ("bpf: lsm: Add selftests for BPF_PROG_TYPE_LSM")
Reported-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200402200751.26372-1-kpsingh@chromium.org
* Load/attach a BPF program that hooks to file_mprotect (int)
and bprm_committed_creds (void).
* Perform an action that triggers the hook.
* Verify if the audit event was received using the shared global
variables for the process executed.
* Verify if the mprotect returns a -EPERM.
Signed-off-by: KP Singh <kpsingh@google.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Florent Revest <revest@google.com>
Reviewed-by: Thomas Garnier <thgarnie@google.com>
Reviewed-by: James Morris <jamorris@linux.microsoft.com>
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20200329004356.27286-8-kpsingh@chromium.org
