-
John Fastabend authored
The addition of map_flags BPF_SOCKMAP_STRPARSER flags was to handle a specific use case where we want to have BPF parse program disabled on an entry in a sockmap. However, Alexei found the API a bit cumbersome and I agreed. Lets remove the STRPARSER flag and support the use case by allowing socks to be in multiple maps. This allows users to create two maps one with programs attached and one without. When socks are added to maps they now inherit any programs attached to the map. This is a nice generalization and IMO improves the API. The API rules are less ambiguous and do not need a flag: - When a sock is added to a sockmap we have two cases, i. The sock map does not have any attached programs so we can add sock to map without inheriting bpf programs. The sock may exist in 0 or more other maps. ii. The sock map has an attached BPF program. To avoid duplicate bpf programs we only add the sock entry if it does not have an existing strparser/verdict attached, returning -EBUSY if a program is already attached. Otherwise attach the program and inherit strparser/verdict programs from the sock map. This allows for socks to be in a multiple maps for redirects and inherit a BPF program from a single map. Also this patch simplifies the logic around BPF_{EXIST|NOEXIST|ANY} flags. In the original patch I tried to be extra clever and only update map entries when necessary. Now I've decided the complexity is not worth it. If users constantly update an entry with the same sock for no reason (i.e. update an entry without actually changing any parameters on map or sock) we still do an alloc/release. Using this and allowing multiple entries of a sock to exist in a map the logic becomes much simpler. Note: Now that multiple maps are supported the "maps" pointer called when a socket is closed becomes a list of maps to remove the sock from. To keep the map up to date when a sock is added to the sockmap we must add the map/elem in the list. Likewise when it is removed we must remove it from the list. This results in searching the per psock list on delete operation. On TCP_CLOSE events we walk the list and remove the psock from all map/entry locations. I don't see any perf implications in this because at most I have a psock in two maps. If a psock were to be in many maps its possibly this might be noticeable on delete but I can't think of a reason to dup a psock in many maps. The sk_callback_lock is used to protect read/writes to the list. This was convenient because in all locations we were taking the lock anyways just after working on the list. Also the lock is per sock so in normal cases we shouldn't see any contention. Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Fixes: 174a79ff ("bpf: sockmap with sk redirect support") Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
2f857d04