Re: [PATCH net-next] Extending bpf_setsockopt with SO_BINDTODEVICE sockopt

[Ferenc Fejes]

> Any specific reason you're not reusing sock_setbindtodevice or at least
> sock_setbindtodevice_locked here? I think, historically, we've
> reimplemented some of the sockopts because they were 'easy' (i.e.
> were just setting a flag in the socket), this one looks more involved.

Yes, there is a copy_from_user in the sock_setbindtodevice for copying
the ioctl netdev name from the user which (I think) not necessary
here. However sock_setbindtodevice_locked is the way to go but I was
afraid to forward declare it in sock.h, change the linkage and export
it in sock.c (I find that a little bit too intrusive).

> I'd suggest, add an optional 'lock_sk' argument to sock_setbindtodevice,
> call it with 'true' from real setsockopt, and call it with 'false'
> here.

Thanks for the advice. However I think I'll wait what happens with
this patch: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/20200520195509.2215098-8-hch@xxxxxx/T/#u
Very strange coincidence that patch was submitted a few hours before
mine (but I noticed just now) and refactor the sock_setbindtodevice in
a way that will useful in my case (also define it in sock.h).

> And, as Andrii pointed out, it would be nice to have a selftest
> that exercises this new option.

Thanks, I will implement them in the next iteration.