From: KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
Cc: open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>, Jann Horn <jannh@google.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] bpf: Add tests for task_local_storage
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 01:05:37 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CACYkzJ6D=vwaEhgaB2vevOo0186m=yfxeKBQ8eWWck8xjtczNA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CACYkzJ6A5GrQhBhv7GC8aeeLpoc7bnN=6Rn2UoM1P90odLZZ=g@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 7:59 PM KP Singh <kpsingh@chromium.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 7:47 PM Alexei Starovoitov
> <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 03, 2020 at 04:31:31PM +0100, KP Singh wrote:
> > > +
> > > +struct storage {
> > > + void *inode;
> > > + unsigned int value;
> > > + /* Lock ensures that spin locked versions of local stoage operations
> > > + * also work, most operations in this tests are still single threaded
> > > + */
> > > + struct bpf_spin_lock lock;
> > > +};
> >
> > I think it's a good idea to test spin_lock in local_storage,
> > but it seems the test is not doing it fully.
> > It's only adding it to the storage, but the program is not accessing it.
>
> I added it here just to check if the offset calculations (map->spin_lock_off)
> are correctly happening for these new maps.
>
> As mentioned in the updates, I do intend to generalize
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/map_tests/sk_storage_map.c which already has
> the threading logic to exercise bpf_spin_lock in storage maps.
>
Actually, after I added simple bpf_spin_{lock, unlock} to the test programs, I
ended up realizing that we have not exposed spin locks to LSM programs
for now, this is because they inherit the tracing helpers.
I saw the docs mention that these are not exposed to tracing programs due to
insufficient preemption checks. Do you think it would be okay to allow them
for LSM programs?
- KP
> Hope this is an okay plan?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-11-04 0:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-03 15:31 [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/8] Implement task_local_storage KP Singh
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 1/8] bpf: Implement task local storage KP Singh
2020-11-03 23:47 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 23:54 ` KP Singh
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/8] libbpf: Add support for " KP Singh
2020-11-03 19:28 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2020-11-03 20:28 ` KP Singh
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 3/8] bpftool: " KP Singh
2020-11-03 23:50 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 4/8] bpf: Implement get_current_task_btf and RET_PTR_TO_BTF_ID KP Singh
2020-11-03 23:57 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/8] bpf: Fix tests for local_storage KP Singh
2020-11-04 0:16 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 6/8] bpf: Update selftests for local_storage to use vmlinux.h KP Singh
2020-11-04 0:16 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 7/8] bpf: Add tests for task_local_storage KP Singh
2020-11-03 18:47 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-11-03 18:59 ` KP Singh
2020-11-04 0:05 ` KP Singh [this message]
2020-11-04 1:27 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-11-04 1:55 ` KP Singh
2020-11-04 1:57 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2020-11-04 6:51 ` John Fastabend
2020-11-04 11:03 ` KP Singh
2020-11-04 11:11 ` KP Singh
2020-11-03 15:31 ` [PATCH bpf-next v2 8/8] bpf: Exercise syscall operations for inode and sk storage KP Singh
2020-11-03 22:32 ` Song Liu
2020-11-03 22:58 ` KP Singh
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='CACYkzJ6D=vwaEhgaB2vevOo0186m=yfxeKBQ8eWWck8xjtczNA@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=kpsingh@chromium.org \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=jannh@google.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
/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).