On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 9:28 AM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Tried to do the following:
>
> 1. Add: static volatile const char __annotate_source1[] = __FILE__;
>to test_rdonly_maps.c and I think it got optimized away :-/
>At least I don't see it in the 'bpftool btf dump' output.
>
> 2. Add:
On 10/16, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 02:21:50PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > >
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 02:21:50PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Even though we have the pointer to user_st
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:34 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:24 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:14 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:24 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:14 PM Andrii Nakryiko
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > On 10/11, Ale
On 10/15, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> >
> > On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Even though we have the pointer to user_struct and can recover
> > > >
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 3:14 PM Andrii Nakryiko
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > >
> > > On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev
>
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 2:22 PM Alexei Starovoitov
wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> >
> > On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Even though we have the pointer to user_struc
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 5:38 PM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
>
> On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > >
> > > Even though we have the pointer to user_struct and can recover
> > > uid of the user who has created the program, it usually
On 10/11, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> >
> > Even though we have the pointer to user_struct and can recover
> > uid of the user who has created the program, it usually contains
> > 0 (root) which is not very informative. Let's store the co
On Fri, Oct 11, 2019 at 9:21 AM Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
>
> Even though we have the pointer to user_struct and can recover
> uid of the user who has created the program, it usually contains
> 0 (root) which is not very informative. Let's store the comm of the
> calling process and export it via
Even though we have the pointer to user_struct and can recover
uid of the user who has created the program, it usually contains
0 (root) which is not very informative. Let's store the comm of the
calling process and export it via bpf_prog_info. This should help
answer the question "which process lo
12 matches
Mail list logo