From: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: Song Liu <liu.song.a23@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Kernel Team <Kernel-team@fb.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: verifier precise tests
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 2019 22:51:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <30110E6F-8895-4C7C-B5C6-36361D294A2C@fb.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190826224724.edxfxbkv6r5wkg6o@ast-mbp>
> On Aug 26, 2019, at 3:47 PM, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2019 at 10:22:13PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
>> On Fri, Aug 23, 2019 at 2:59 AM Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Use BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ flag to check that precision
>>> tracking works as expected by comparing every step it takes.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
>>>
>>> +static bool cmp_str_seq(const char *log, const char *exp)
>>
>> Maybe call it str_str_seq()?
>
> imo cmp*() returns the result of comparison.
> Which is either boolean or -1,0,1.
> Whereas str*() should return the address, index, or offset.
> Hence I used cmp_ prefix here.
Good point. I didn't think about this.
>
>>> static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
>>> int *passes, int *errors)
>>> {
>>> @@ -897,14 +929,20 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
>>> pflags |= BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT;
>>> if (test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
>>> pflags |= BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT;
>>> + if (test->flags & ~3)
>>> + pflags |= test->flags;
>> ^^^^^^ why do we need these two lines?
>
> To pass flags from test into attr.prog_flags.
> Older F_NEEDS_* and F_LOAD_* may use some cleanup and can be removed,
> but it would be a different patch.
Sounds good.
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>
Thanks!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-26 22:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-23 5:52 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] bpf: precision tracking tests Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-23 5:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf: introduce verifier internal test flag Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-26 5:09 ` Song Liu
2019-08-23 5:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] tools/bpf: sync bpf.h Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-26 5:10 ` Song Liu
2019-08-23 5:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] selftests/bpf: verifier precise tests Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-26 5:22 ` Song Liu
2019-08-26 22:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-26 22:51 ` Song Liu [this message]
2019-08-23 5:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: add precision tracking test Alexei Starovoitov
2019-08-26 5:33 ` Song Liu
2019-08-27 22:43 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] bpf: precision tracking tests Daniel Borkmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=30110E6F-8895-4C7C-B5C6-36361D294A2C@fb.com \
--to=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=Kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=liu.song.a23@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).