On 10/8/19 10:29 PM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:04 PM Alexei Starovoitov <a...@kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> Disallow bpf_probe_read() and bpf_probe_read_str() helpers in
>> raw_tracepoint bpf programs that use in-kernel BTF to track
>> types of memory accesses.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <a...@kernel.org>
>> ---
>>   kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 4 ++++
>>   1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> index 52f7e9d8c29b..7c607f79f1bb 100644
>> --- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> +++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
>> @@ -700,6 +700,8 @@ tracing_func_proto(enum bpf_func_id func_id, const 
>> struct bpf_prog *prog)
>>          case BPF_FUNC_map_peek_elem:
>>                  return &bpf_map_peek_elem_proto;
>>          case BPF_FUNC_probe_read:
>> +               if (prog->expected_attach_type)
>> +                       return NULL;
> 
> This can unintentionally disable bpf_probe_read/bpf_probe_read_str for
> non-raw_tp programs that happened to specify non-zero
> expected_attach_type, which we don't really validate for
> kprobe/tp/perf_event/etc. So how about passing program type into
> tracing_func_proto() so that we can have more granular control?

yeah. that sucks that we forgot to check expected_attach_type for zero
when that field was introduced for networking progs.
I'll add new u32 to prog_load command instead. It's cleaner too.

Reply via email to