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=-6.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham 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 880CFC433E0 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F83220771 for ; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="H+yYat9b" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732641AbgFSNdE (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:33:04 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-2.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.61]:40144 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726124AbgFSNdB (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:33:01 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1592573579; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=TVgPD+WOoayd75ZUMV+EBfysFWdmf/tU8Wvtw0tElZw=; b=H+yYat9bTOTy+aVdEjCcjTq6w7LnEu79X4NYIfMvxYp1hO8a2PzDk3BAxvkPKUp/UmEqlv VXWnLt83bz8SQTYtHbkDBoi9HNSbiW8J26vw/ChxQdy/P7/b6ymDX9hMsDxgeXiDvuQD2s XGQEJ/+YWh8NUq+kD/C/Zk+qXKUFl2w= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-412-V2PRrXNqP_askGN3eXLbWw-1; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 09:32:55 -0400 X-MC-Unique: V2PRrXNqP_askGN3eXLbWw-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 571D8184D144; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:32:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krava (unknown [10.40.195.134]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with SMTP id F2B5110013D7; Fri, 19 Jun 2020 13:32:49 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2020 15:32:49 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: Andrii Nakryiko Cc: Jiri Olsa , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Networking , bpf , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , Martin KaFai Lau , David Miller , John Fastabend , Wenbo Zhang , KP Singh , Andrii Nakryiko , Brendan Gregg , Florent Revest , Al Viro Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/11] selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for d_path helper Message-ID: <20200619133249.GK2465907@krava> References: <20200616100512.2168860-1-jolsa@kernel.org> <20200616100512.2168860-11-jolsa@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Sender: bpf-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 09:38:56PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Tue, Jun 16, 2020 at 3:06 AM Jiri Olsa wrote: > > > > Adding verifier test for attaching tracing program and > > calling d_path helper from within and testing that it's > > allowed for dentry_open function and denied for 'd_path' > > function with appropriate error. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa > > --- > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 13 ++++++- > > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/d_path.c | 38 +++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/d_path.c > > > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c > > index 78a6bae56ea6..3cce3dc766a2 100644 > > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c > > @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ struct bpf_test { > > bpf_testdata_struct_t retvals[MAX_TEST_RUNS]; > > }; > > enum bpf_attach_type expected_attach_type; > > + const char *kfunc; > > }; > > > > /* Note we want this to be 64 bit aligned so that the end of our array is > > @@ -984,8 +985,18 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv, > > attr.log_level = 4; > > attr.prog_flags = pflags; > > > > + if (prog_type == BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING && test->kfunc) { > > + attr.attach_btf_id = libbpf_find_vmlinux_btf_id(test->kfunc, > > + attr.expected_attach_type); > > if (!attr.attach_btf_id) > emit more meaningful error, than later during load? ok > > > + } > > + > > fd_prog = bpf_load_program_xattr(&attr, bpf_vlog, sizeof(bpf_vlog)); > > - if (fd_prog < 0 && !bpf_probe_prog_type(prog_type, 0)) { > > + > > + /* BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING requires more setup and > > + * bpf_probe_prog_type won't give correct answer > > + */ > > + if (fd_prog < 0 && (prog_type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING) && > > nit: () are redundant ok > > > + !bpf_probe_prog_type(prog_type, 0)) { > > printf("SKIP (unsupported program type %d)\n", prog_type); > > skips++; > > goto close_fds; > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/d_path.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/d_path.c > > new file mode 100644 > > index 000000000000..e08181abc056 > > --- /dev/null > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/d_path.c > > @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ > > +{ > > + "d_path accept", > > + .insns = { > > + BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1, 0), > > + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), > > + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8), > > + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, 0), > > + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6, 0), > > + BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_3, 8), > > + BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_d_path), > > + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > > + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > > + }, > > + .errstr = "R0 max value is outside of the array range", > > + .result = ACCEPT, > > accept with error string expected? oops, probably lefover, will check thanks, jirka > > > > + .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, > > + .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_FENTRY, > > + .kfunc = "dentry_open", > > +}, > > +{ > > + "d_path reject", > > + .insns = { > > + BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1, 0), > > + BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10), > > + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8), > > + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, 0), > > + BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6, 0), > > + BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_3, 8), > > + BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_d_path), > > + BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > > + BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > > + }, > > + .errstr = "helper call is not allowed in probe", > > + .result = REJECT, > > + .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACING, > > + .expected_attach_type = BPF_TRACE_FENTRY, > > + .kfunc = "d_path", > > +}, > > -- > > 2.25.4 > > >