lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: Potential issues (security and otherwise) with the current cgroup-bpf API
On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 05:40:53PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
>>
>> By the way, even if Alexei is right, the BPF_PROG_DETACH API doesn't
>> even take a reference to a BPF program as an argument. What is it
>> supposed to do if this mechanism ever gets extended?
>
> we just add another field to that anonymous union just like
> we did for other commands and everything is backwards compatible.
> It's the basics of bpf syscall that we've been relying on for some
> time now and it worked just fine.

And what happens if you don't specify that member and two programs are attached?

--Andy

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-12-20 06:27    [W:0.082 / U:3.564 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site