All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [PATCH bpf-next 0/2] Split bpf_sk_lookup remote_port field
@ 2022-02-07 13:14 Jakub Sitnicki
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide Jakub Sitnicki
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup Jakub Sitnicki
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-02-07 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

Following the recent split-up of the bpf_sock dst_port field, apply the same to
technique to the bpf_sk_lookup remote_port field to make uAPI more user
friendly.

Jakub Sitnicki (2):
  bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup

 include/uapi/linux/bpf.h                           | 3 ++-
 net/core/filter.c                                  | 3 ++-
 tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h                     | 3 ++-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c | 6 ++++++
 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-07 13:14 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2] Split bpf_sk_lookup remote_port field Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-07 13:14 ` Jakub Sitnicki
  2022-02-07 19:14   ` Yonghong Song
  2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup Jakub Sitnicki
  1 sibling, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-02-07 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

remote_port is another case of a BPF context field documented as a 32-bit
value in network byte order for which the BPF context access converter
generates a load of a zero-padded 16-bit integer in network byte order.

First such case was dst_port in bpf_sock which got addressed in commit
4421a582718a ("bpf: Make dst_port field in struct bpf_sock 16-bit wide").

Loading 4-bytes from the remote_port offset and converting the value with
bpf_ntohl() leads to surprising results, as the expected value is shifted
by 16 bits.

Reduce the confusion by splitting the field in two - a 16-bit field holding
a big-endian integer, and a 16-bit zero-padding anonymous field that
follows it.

Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
---
 include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 3 ++-
 net/core/filter.c        | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index a7f0ddedac1f..afe3d0d7f5f2 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -6453,7 +6453,8 @@ struct bpf_sk_lookup {
 	__u32 protocol;		/* IP protocol (IPPROTO_TCP, IPPROTO_UDP) */
 	__u32 remote_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 remote_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
-	__u32 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__be16 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__u16 :16;		/* Zero padding */
 	__u32 local_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_port;	/* Host byte order */
diff --git a/net/core/filter.c b/net/core/filter.c
index 99a05199a806..83f06d3b2c52 100644
--- a/net/core/filter.c
+++ b/net/core/filter.c
@@ -10843,7 +10843,8 @@ static bool sk_lookup_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip4):
 	case bpf_ctx_range_till(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_ip6[0], remote_ip6[3]):
 	case bpf_ctx_range_till(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip6[0], local_ip6[3]):
-	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port):
+	case offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port) ...
+	     offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_ip4) - 1:
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, local_port):
 	case bpf_ctx_range(struct bpf_sk_lookup, ingress_ifindex):
 		bpf_ctx_record_field_size(info, sizeof(__u32));
-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup
  2022-02-07 13:14 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2] Split bpf_sk_lookup remote_port field Jakub Sitnicki
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-07 13:14 ` Jakub Sitnicki
  2022-02-07 19:20   ` Yonghong Song
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-02-07 13:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: bpf
  Cc: netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

Extend the context access tests for sk_lookup prog to cover the surprising
case of a 4-byte load from the remote_port field, where the expected value
is actually shifted by 16 bits.

Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
---
 tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h                     | 3 ++-
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c | 6 ++++++
 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index a7f0ddedac1f..afe3d0d7f5f2 100644
--- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -6453,7 +6453,8 @@ struct bpf_sk_lookup {
 	__u32 protocol;		/* IP protocol (IPPROTO_TCP, IPPROTO_UDP) */
 	__u32 remote_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 remote_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
-	__u32 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__be16 remote_port;	/* Network byte order */
+	__u16 :16;		/* Zero padding */
 	__u32 local_ip4;	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_ip6[4];	/* Network byte order */
 	__u32 local_port;	/* Host byte order */
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c
index 83b0aaa52ef7..bf5b7caefdd0 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup.c
@@ -392,6 +392,7 @@ int ctx_narrow_access(struct bpf_sk_lookup *ctx)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock *sk;
 	int err, family;
+	__u32 val_u32;
 	bool v4;
 
 	v4 = (ctx->family == AF_INET);
@@ -418,6 +419,11 @@ int ctx_narrow_access(struct bpf_sk_lookup *ctx)
 	if (LSW(ctx->remote_port, 0) != SRC_PORT)
 		return SK_DROP;
 
+	/* Load from remote_port field with zero padding (backward compatibility) */
+	val_u32 = *(__u32 *)&ctx->remote_port;
+	if (val_u32 != bpf_htonl(bpf_ntohs(SRC_PORT) << 16))
+		return SK_DROP;
+
 	/* Narrow loads from local_port field. Expect DST_PORT. */
 	if (LSB(ctx->local_port, 0) != ((DST_PORT >> 0) & 0xff) ||
 	    LSB(ctx->local_port, 1) != ((DST_PORT >> 8) & 0xff) ||
-- 
2.31.1


^ permalink raw reply related	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-07 19:14   ` Yonghong Song
  2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2022-02-07 19:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jakub Sitnicki, bpf
  Cc: netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team



On 2/7/22 5:14 AM, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> remote_port is another case of a BPF context field documented as a 32-bit
> value in network byte order for which the BPF context access converter
> generates a load of a zero-padded 16-bit integer in network byte order.
> 
> First such case was dst_port in bpf_sock which got addressed in commit
> 4421a582718a ("bpf: Make dst_port field in struct bpf_sock 16-bit wide").
> 
> Loading 4-bytes from the remote_port offset and converting the value with
> bpf_ntohl() leads to surprising results, as the expected value is shifted
> by 16 bits.
> 
> Reduce the confusion by splitting the field in two - a 16-bit field holding
> a big-endian integer, and a 16-bit zero-padding anonymous field that
> follows it.
> 
> Suggested-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-07 19:20   ` Yonghong Song
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Yonghong Song @ 2022-02-07 19:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jakub Sitnicki, bpf
  Cc: netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team



On 2/7/22 5:14 AM, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> Extend the context access tests for sk_lookup prog to cover the surprising
> case of a 4-byte load from the remote_port field, where the expected value
> is actually shifted by 16 bits.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>

Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>


^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
  2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2022-02-07 22:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jakub Sitnicki, bpf
  Cc: kbuild-all, netdev, Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann,
	Andrii Nakryiko, kernel-team

Hi Jakub,

I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:

[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]

url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Jakub-Sitnicki/Split-bpf_sk_lookup-remote_port-field/20220207-215137
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
config: sparc-randconfig-s031-20220207 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220208/202202080631.n8UjqRXy-lkp@intel.com/config)
compiler: sparc64-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
reproduce:
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # apt-get install sparse
        # sparse version: v0.6.4-dirty
        # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/b859a90e4c32a55e71d2731dd8dae96d7ad1defe
        git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
        git fetch --no-tags linux-review Jakub-Sitnicki/Split-bpf_sk_lookup-remote_port-field/20220207-215137
        git checkout b859a90e4c32a55e71d2731dd8dae96d7ad1defe
        # save the config file to linux build tree
        mkdir build_dir
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.2.0 make.cross C=1 CF='-fdiagnostic-prefix -D__CHECK_ENDIAN__' O=build_dir ARCH=sparc SHELL=/bin/bash net/bpf/

If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>


sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>> net/bpf/test_run.c:1149:55: sparse: sparse: restricted __be16 degrades to integer

vim +1149 net/bpf/test_run.c

7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1111  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1112  int bpf_prog_test_run_sk_lookup(struct bpf_prog *prog, const union bpf_attr *kattr,
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1113  				union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1114  {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1115  	struct bpf_test_timer t = { NO_PREEMPT };
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1116  	struct bpf_prog_array *progs = NULL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1117  	struct bpf_sk_lookup_kern ctx = {};
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1118  	u32 repeat = kattr->test.repeat;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1119  	struct bpf_sk_lookup *user_ctx;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1120  	u32 retval, duration;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1121  	int ret = -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1122  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1123  	if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_LOOKUP)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1124  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1125  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1126  	if (kattr->test.flags || kattr->test.cpu)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1127  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1128  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1129  	if (kattr->test.data_in || kattr->test.data_size_in || kattr->test.data_out ||
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1130  	    kattr->test.data_size_out)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1131  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1132  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1133  	if (!repeat)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1134  		repeat = 1;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1135  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1136  	user_ctx = bpf_ctx_init(kattr, sizeof(*user_ctx));
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1137  	if (IS_ERR(user_ctx))
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1138  		return PTR_ERR(user_ctx);
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1139  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1140  	if (!user_ctx)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1141  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1142  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1143  	if (user_ctx->sk)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1144  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1145  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1146  	if (!range_is_zero(user_ctx, offsetofend(typeof(*user_ctx), local_port), sizeof(*user_ctx)))
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1147  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149  	if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1150  		ret = -ERANGE;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1151  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1152  	}
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1153  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1154  	ctx.family = (u16)user_ctx->family;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1155  	ctx.protocol = (u16)user_ctx->protocol;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1156  	ctx.dport = (u16)user_ctx->local_port;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1157  	ctx.sport = (__force __be16)user_ctx->remote_port;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1158  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1159  	switch (ctx.family) {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1160  	case AF_INET:
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1161  		ctx.v4.daddr = (__force __be32)user_ctx->local_ip4;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1162  		ctx.v4.saddr = (__force __be32)user_ctx->remote_ip4;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1163  		break;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1164  

---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all@lists.01.org

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
@ 2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: kernel test robot @ 2022-02-07 22:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kbuild-all

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5640 bytes --]

Hi Jakub,

I love your patch! Perhaps something to improve:

[auto build test WARNING on bpf-next/master]

url:    https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commits/Jakub-Sitnicki/Split-bpf_sk_lookup-remote_port-field/20220207-215137
base:   https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/bpf/bpf-next.git master
config: sparc-randconfig-s031-20220207 (https://download.01.org/0day-ci/archive/20220208/202202080631.n8UjqRXy-lkp(a)intel.com/config)
compiler: sparc64-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.2.0
reproduce:
        wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/intel/lkp-tests/master/sbin/make.cross -O ~/bin/make.cross
        chmod +x ~/bin/make.cross
        # apt-get install sparse
        # sparse version: v0.6.4-dirty
        # https://github.com/0day-ci/linux/commit/b859a90e4c32a55e71d2731dd8dae96d7ad1defe
        git remote add linux-review https://github.com/0day-ci/linux
        git fetch --no-tags linux-review Jakub-Sitnicki/Split-bpf_sk_lookup-remote_port-field/20220207-215137
        git checkout b859a90e4c32a55e71d2731dd8dae96d7ad1defe
        # save the config file to linux build tree
        mkdir build_dir
        COMPILER_INSTALL_PATH=$HOME/0day COMPILER=gcc-11.2.0 make.cross C=1 CF='-fdiagnostic-prefix -D__CHECK_ENDIAN__' O=build_dir ARCH=sparc SHELL=/bin/bash net/bpf/

If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag as appropriate
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>


sparse warnings: (new ones prefixed by >>)
>> net/bpf/test_run.c:1149:55: sparse: sparse: restricted __be16 degrades to integer

vim +1149 net/bpf/test_run.c

7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1111  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1112  int bpf_prog_test_run_sk_lookup(struct bpf_prog *prog, const union bpf_attr *kattr,
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1113  				union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1114  {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1115  	struct bpf_test_timer t = { NO_PREEMPT };
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1116  	struct bpf_prog_array *progs = NULL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1117  	struct bpf_sk_lookup_kern ctx = {};
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1118  	u32 repeat = kattr->test.repeat;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1119  	struct bpf_sk_lookup *user_ctx;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1120  	u32 retval, duration;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1121  	int ret = -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1122  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1123  	if (prog->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_LOOKUP)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1124  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1125  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1126  	if (kattr->test.flags || kattr->test.cpu)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1127  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1128  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1129  	if (kattr->test.data_in || kattr->test.data_size_in || kattr->test.data_out ||
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1130  	    kattr->test.data_size_out)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1131  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1132  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1133  	if (!repeat)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1134  		repeat = 1;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1135  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1136  	user_ctx = bpf_ctx_init(kattr, sizeof(*user_ctx));
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1137  	if (IS_ERR(user_ctx))
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1138  		return PTR_ERR(user_ctx);
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1139  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1140  	if (!user_ctx)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1141  		return -EINVAL;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1142  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1143  	if (user_ctx->sk)
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1144  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1145  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1146  	if (!range_is_zero(user_ctx, offsetofend(typeof(*user_ctx), local_port), sizeof(*user_ctx)))
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1147  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149  	if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1150  		ret = -ERANGE;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1151  		goto out;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1152  	}
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1153  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1154  	ctx.family = (u16)user_ctx->family;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1155  	ctx.protocol = (u16)user_ctx->protocol;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1156  	ctx.dport = (u16)user_ctx->local_port;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1157  	ctx.sport = (__force __be16)user_ctx->remote_port;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1158  
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1159  	switch (ctx.family) {
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1160  	case AF_INET:
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1161  		ctx.v4.daddr = (__force __be32)user_ctx->local_ip4;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1162  		ctx.v4.saddr = (__force __be32)user_ctx->remote_ip4;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1163  		break;
7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1164  

---
0-DAY CI Kernel Test Service, Intel Corporation
https://lists.01.org/hyperkitty/list/kbuild-all(a)lists.01.org

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
@ 2022-02-08 19:28       ` Alexei Starovoitov
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-02-08 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kernel test robot
  Cc: Jakub Sitnicki, bpf, kbuild-all, Network Development,
	Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {

Jakub,
are you planning to respin and remove that check?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
@ 2022-02-08 19:28       ` Alexei Starovoitov
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-02-08 19:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kbuild-all

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 305 bytes --]

On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {

Jakub,
are you planning to respin and remove that check?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-08 19:28       ` Alexei Starovoitov
@ 2022-02-08 20:42         ` Jakub Sitnicki
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-02-08 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Alexei Starovoitov
  Cc: kernel test robot, bpf, kbuild-all, Network Development,
	Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 08:28 PM CET, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
>> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
>> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
>
> Jakub,
> are you planning to respin and remove that check?

Yes, certainly. Just didn't get to it today.

Can either respin the series or send a follow-up. Whatever works.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
@ 2022-02-08 20:42         ` Jakub Sitnicki
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-02-08 20:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kbuild-all

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 496 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 08:28 PM CET, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
>> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
>> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
>
> Jakub,
> are you planning to respin and remove that check?

Yes, certainly. Just didn't get to it today.

Can either respin the series or send a follow-up. Whatever works.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
  2022-02-08 20:42         ` Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-02-08 20:58           ` Alexei Starovoitov
  -1 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-02-08 20:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Jakub Sitnicki
  Cc: kernel test robot, bpf, kbuild-all, Network Development,
	Alexei Starovoitov, Daniel Borkmann, Andrii Nakryiko,
	kernel-team

On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 12:42 PM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 08:28 PM CET, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> >> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
> >> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
> >
> > Jakub,
> > are you planning to respin and remove that check?
>
> Yes, certainly. Just didn't get to it today.
>
> Can either respin the series or send a follow-up. Whatever works.

I think respin is better.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

* Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide
@ 2022-02-08 20:58           ` Alexei Starovoitov
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread
From: Alexei Starovoitov @ 2022-02-08 20:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: kbuild-all

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 626 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 12:42 PM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 08, 2022 at 08:28 PM CET, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 2:05 PM kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com> wrote:
> >> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03  1148
> >> 7c32e8f8bc33a5f Lorenz Bauer 2021-03-03 @1149   if (user_ctx->local_port > U16_MAX || user_ctx->remote_port > U16_MAX) {
> >
> > Jakub,
> > are you planning to respin and remove that check?
>
> Yes, certainly. Just didn't get to it today.
>
> Can either respin the series or send a follow-up. Whatever works.

I think respin is better.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2022-02-08 22:23 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-02-07 13:14 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2] Split bpf_sk_lookup remote_port field Jakub Sitnicki
2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide Jakub Sitnicki
2022-02-07 19:14   ` Yonghong Song
2022-02-07 22:04   ` kernel test robot
2022-02-07 22:04     ` kernel test robot
2022-02-08 19:28     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-02-08 19:28       ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-02-08 20:42       ` Jakub Sitnicki
2022-02-08 20:42         ` Jakub Sitnicki
2022-02-08 20:58         ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-02-08 20:58           ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-02-07 13:14 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup Jakub Sitnicki
2022-02-07 19:20   ` Yonghong Song

This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.