> On Aug 28, 2019, at 10:12 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <a...@kernel.org> wrote:
> 

[...]

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c 
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index 44e2d640b088..91a7f25512ca 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -805,10 +805,20 @@ static void do_test_fixup(struct bpf_test *test, enum 
> bpf_prog_type prog_type,
>       }
> }
> 
> +struct libcap {
> +     struct __user_cap_header_struct hdr;
> +     struct __user_cap_data_struct data[2];
> +};
> +

I am confused by struct libcap. Why do we need it? 

> static int set_admin(bool admin)
> {
>       cap_t caps;
> -     const cap_value_t cap_val = CAP_SYS_ADMIN;
> +     /* need CAP_BPF to load progs and CAP_NET_ADMIN to run networking progs,
> +      * and CAP_TRACING to create stackmap
> +      */
> +     const cap_value_t cap_net_admin = CAP_NET_ADMIN;
> +     const cap_value_t cap_sys_admin = CAP_SYS_ADMIN;
> +     struct libcap *cap;
>       int ret = -1;
> 
>       caps = cap_get_proc();
> @@ -816,11 +826,26 @@ static int set_admin(bool admin)
>               perror("cap_get_proc");
>               return -1;
>       }
> -     if (cap_set_flag(caps, CAP_EFFECTIVE, 1, &cap_val,
> +     cap = (struct libcap *)caps;
> +     if (cap_set_flag(caps, CAP_EFFECTIVE, 1, &cap_sys_admin, CAP_CLEAR)) {
> +             perror("cap_set_flag clear admin");
> +             goto out;
> +     }
> +     if (cap_set_flag(caps, CAP_EFFECTIVE, 1, &cap_net_admin,
>                               admin ? CAP_SET : CAP_CLEAR)) {
> -             perror("cap_set_flag");
> +             perror("cap_set_flag set_or_clear net");
>               goto out;
>       }
> +     /* libcap is likely old and simply ignores CAP_BPF and CAP_TRACING,
> +      * so update effective bits manually
> +      */
> +     if (admin) {
> +             cap->data[1].effective |= 1 << (38 /* CAP_BPF */ - 32);
> +             cap->data[1].effective |= 1 << (39 /* CAP_TRACING */ - 32);
> +     } else {
> +             cap->data[1].effective &= ~(1 << (38 - 32));
> +             cap->data[1].effective &= ~(1 << (39 - 32));
> +     }

And why we do not need cap->data[0]?

Thanks,
Song

Reply via email to