bpf.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>
To: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	<bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] bpf: do .test_run in dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 12:09:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20211001190902.c5zmrxedytkcrc3l@kafai-mbp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <89ce4b1c-6ea6-80b9-ec2f-5a6d49dd591b@huawei.com>

On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 07:05:41PM +0800, Hou Tao wrote:
> >> diff --git a/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c b/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
> >> index 1249e4bb4ccb..da77736cd093 100644
> >> --- a/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
> >> +++ b/net/bpf/bpf_dummy_struct_ops.c
> >> @@ -10,12 +10,188 @@
> >>  
> >>  extern struct bpf_struct_ops bpf_bpf_dummy_ops;
> >>  
> >> +static const struct btf_type *dummy_ops_state;
> >> +
> >> +static struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *
> >> +init_dummy_ops_state(const union bpf_attr *kattr)
> >> +{
> >> +	__u32 size_in;
> >> +	struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state;
> >> +	void __user *data_in;
> >> +
> >> +	size_in = kattr->test.data_size_in;
> > These are the args for the test functions?  Using ctx_in/ctx_size_in
> > and ctx_out/ctx_size_out instead should be more consistent
> > with other bpf_prog_test_run* in test_run.c.
> Yes, there are args. I had think about using ctx_in/ctx_out, but I didn't
> because I thought the program which using ctx_in/ctx_out only has
> one argument (namely bpf_context *), but the bpf_dummy_ops::init
> may have multiple arguments. Anyway I will check it again and use
> ctx_in/ctx_out if possible.
got it.

ctx_in could have multiple args.
I was more thinking on the muliple arg test also. Potentially some of them
are just integers, e.g. 

int test2(struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state, char a, short b, int c, long d)
{

}

All args can be put in ctx_in like bpf_prog_test_run_raw_tp().
Take a look at raw_tp_test_run.c.  Although it is not strictly
necessary to use u64 for all args in the struct_ops test
because the struct_ops test still wants to prepare the
trampoline to catch the return value issue...etc,  passing
an array of u64 args in ctx_in should make it easier to program
the userspace and optimizing the ctx_in based on the sizeof each
arg seems not gaining much as a test also.

For "struct bpf_dummy_ops_state *state", instead of making an
exception to pass ptr arg in data_in,  the user ptr can be directly
passed as a u64 stored in ctx_in also, then there is no need to use
data_in or data_size_in.  If it is needed, the userspace's
sizeof(struct bpf_dummy_ops_state) can be found from the
prog->aux->btf.
There is no need to use data_out/data_out_size also, just directly
copy it back to the same user ptr stored in ctx_in.

  reply	other threads:[~2021-10-01 19:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-09-28  2:52 [PATCH bpf-next 0/5] introduce " Hou Tao
2021-09-28  2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/5] bpf: add dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS for test purpose Hou Tao
2021-09-28  2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/5] bpf: factor out a helper to prepare trampoline for struct_ops prog Hou Tao
2021-09-29 17:56   ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-09-30 10:17     ` Hou Tao
2021-10-01 17:39       ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-09-28  2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] bpf: do .test_run in dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS Hou Tao
2021-09-29 18:55   ` Martin KaFai Lau
2021-09-30 11:05     ` Hou Tao
2021-10-01 19:09       ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2021-09-28  2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/5] bpf: hook .test_run for struct_ops program Hou Tao
2021-09-28  2:52 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: test return value handling for struct_ops prog Hou Tao
2021-09-28 23:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2021-09-30 11:08     ` Hou Tao

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=20211001190902.c5zmrxedytkcrc3l@kafai-mbp \
    --to=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=houtao1@huawei.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --subject='Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/5] bpf: do .test_run in dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS' \
    /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

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).