On 10/02, Song Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2019 at 10:36 AM Stanislav Fomichev <s...@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > Always use init_net flow dissector BPF program if it's attached and fall
> > back to the per-net namespace one. Also, deny installing new programs if
> > there is already one attached to the root namespace.
> > Users can still detach their BPF programs, but can't attach any
> > new ones (-EPERM).
> >
> > Cc: Petar Penkov <ppen...@google.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <s...@google.com>
> > ---
> > Documentation/bpf/prog_flow_dissector.rst | 3 +++
> > net/core/flow_dissector.c | 11 ++++++++++-
> > 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/Documentation/bpf/prog_flow_dissector.rst
> > b/Documentation/bpf/prog_flow_dissector.rst
> > index a78bf036cadd..4d86780ab0f1 100644
> > --- a/Documentation/bpf/prog_flow_dissector.rst
> > +++ b/Documentation/bpf/prog_flow_dissector.rst
> > @@ -142,3 +142,6 @@ BPF flow dissector doesn't support exporting all the
> > metadata that in-kernel
> > C-based implementation can export. Notable example is single VLAN (802.1Q)
> > and double VLAN (802.1AD) tags. Please refer to the ``struct
> > bpf_flow_keys``
> > for a set of information that's currently can be exported from the BPF
> > context.
> > +
> > +When BPF flow dissector is attached to the root network namespace
> > (machine-wide
> > +policy), users can't override it in their child network namespaces.
> > diff --git a/net/core/flow_dissector.c b/net/core/flow_dissector.c
> > index 7c09d87d3269..494e2016fe84 100644
> > --- a/net/core/flow_dissector.c
> > +++ b/net/core/flow_dissector.c
> > @@ -115,6 +115,11 @@ int skb_flow_dissector_bpf_prog_attach(const union
> > bpf_attr *attr,
> > struct bpf_prog *attached;
> > struct net *net;
> >
> > + if (rcu_access_pointer(init_net.flow_dissector_prog)) {
> > + /* Can't override root flow dissector program */
> > + return -EPERM;
>
> Maybe -EBUSY is more accurate?
I'm not sure, -EBUSY to me means that I can retry and (maybe) eventually
will succeed. Maybe return -EEXIST? At least it gives a hint that BPF
flow dissector is already there and retrying won't help. Thoughts?
> Thanks,
> Song
