From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8870C33CA7 for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 01:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 724D02084D for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 01:07:00 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="Ap9WEeR1" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1731845AbgALBHA (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jan 2020 20:07:00 -0500 Received: from mail-il1-f181.google.com ([209.85.166.181]:43627 "EHLO mail-il1-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1731841AbgALBHA (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jan 2020 20:07:00 -0500 Received: by mail-il1-f181.google.com with SMTP id v69so4924761ili.10; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 17:06:59 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oDI+n2k3ddmMpnEGOLZkg6TpTxZKeSdp9ompHX+NuMQ=; b=Ap9WEeR1Ad3HNaj2YTso4GRuvpMSLzLowA1435rIOZn461Y+SsK4/HlMCnwmXYEYNT Ci2Earg0JOCVYYPvuENQk/uYt8wCN+SiDXG87rA6kOCmXjI6vzgt42qks8EGWUwmiUBp 7tLox7hkViQ8MsawG/GPMv9RLhWcqIEdRV47d+uGtBEPVZzIlGxhRfvejyi16lYQz5s2 2CG9XN+jr2KRfzELpRrdC+AJq9St2pLfYKlrAXW+oExr3zMgzvGhlgeXG9nVUVQnh8dk TPjkp3iIpHavTwTw9rDjGENMbEA4WU/SvdpD4yZKtbNF86wm7bFM9cd/1rTpdBF2V8jc Ew2g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=oDI+n2k3ddmMpnEGOLZkg6TpTxZKeSdp9ompHX+NuMQ=; b=qtEdyEXycMwiOyRjJ0IFxNO8jpzo0K7x29VM/YnOUWegPx+/+GBOdkfr4vOkglNK2r Z6Wg9spgXASab21Iq7lxzvKjTHwNISZ4qdMv+ehf7OU/WK19O+mfvOBeH+oL4/a8ZYmk JggmwEwW6bJm7Y/AApnhAJups7/IGmvVyIdu43qIMxQktLcKAAmnK2FWg6goJaljfV9E dSdRE5p8I6GPaV5yxbrGuPsR8zDUxRnhoAoO1r2X429gutg/HT20OPj3M6ccx2NU9Ncu QvR0BwFizva41pYFMJLpSZH5F+itOeaXeXbDYckhY0ARFGtiwacs6ep6QpCneZ3fUZle 9VIg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAX5z6agMSHW5yVeEJmK+SEF/dViM+hKD6t/v9Mw44/ITvcX4Svy N8CAKTMwlELsc8KpNGI/QDI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyYs8yvijIc8eaP0PAJ/6Yg9QoGkznEkH4KBjTGTN7ihqxYVp9p4xePTmwkKqROBWSGaelwew== X-Received: by 2002:a92:d5c3:: with SMTP id d3mr9156718ilq.250.1578791219376; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 17:06:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([184.63.162.180]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id f189sm1633156ioa.10.2020.01.11.17.06.57 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 11 Jan 2020 17:06:58 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2020 17:06:52 -0800 From: John Fastabend To: Jakub Sitnicki , bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, kernel-team@cloudflare.com, Eric Dumazet , John Fastabend , Lorenz Bauer , Martin KaFai Lau Message-ID: <5e1a712c16d1_76782ace374ba5c02b@john-XPS-13-9370.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <20200110105027.257877-12-jakub@cloudflare.com> References: <20200110105027.257877-1-jakub@cloudflare.com> <20200110105027.257877-12-jakub@cloudflare.com> Subject: RE: [PATCH bpf-next v2 11/11] selftests/bpf: Tests for SOCKMAP holding listening sockets Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: bpf-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org Jakub Sitnicki wrote: > Now that SOCKMAP can store listening sockets, user-space and BPF API is > open to a new set of potential pitfalls. Exercise the map operations (with > extra attention to code paths susceptible to races between map ops and > socket cloning), and BPF helpers that work with SOCKMAP to gain confidence > that all works as expected. > > Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki > --- [...] > +static void test_sockmap_insert_listening(int family, int sotype, int mapfd) > +{ > + u64 value; > + u32 key; > + int s; > + > + s = listen_loopback(family, sotype); > + if (s < 0) > + return; Will the test be marked OK if listen fails here? Should we mark it skipped or maybe even failed? Just concerned it may be passing even if the update doesn't actually happen. > + > + key = 0; > + value = s; > + xbpf_map_update_elem(mapfd, &key, &value, BPF_NOEXIST); > + xclose(s); > +} Thanks, John