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 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8187C433EF for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 22:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0A061212 for ; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 22:19:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230331AbhJTWVb (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2021 18:21:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46842 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230325AbhJTWVb (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Oct 2021 18:21:31 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2b]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 34500C06161C; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:19:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2b.google.com with SMTP id i84so14473949ybc.12; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:19:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=e2cQZj1e5vJAdxpSKsjPDkNiKYKpcEjmrgKs4b0IylE=; b=HrIBWZqr8jP3MDBHAt7pFSvT2Y3xFrHlUSF7F/Y7uJSz5cmdZKqEZzmcK0makwzoBc mIrGMeYRl2i+dqvTer/H4FJxKAanFDnPCeJ6CqYNtBDuDxWmGUyJOIPvJY96K4E25TsP 3BCsN3qCxSEuEwfLC+W9THCnQts9GBJfji9ztKO3G2O1uyytn4cC02vpxui3NKuAzFTd F/6NMiQr9v5H5J4z5YFT7ffcD2brGvTwXt3a8TosQXPCSfnND4KOEngR5sU5JVF+DlLu mzjgsv77bqsQuKp6aLdkKKL6QVIupLbnPN6ORwOz19tfPX/ECWjRXUiEhzqJU7NPZKeB U67A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=e2cQZj1e5vJAdxpSKsjPDkNiKYKpcEjmrgKs4b0IylE=; b=DA6b4nWY/8xHhSXkI0Vy5tNE/lduykBXkc/PqaNfiBmcd7cUr2v/nFYa2AA7wNYMtB vaooXjT5AL9EUAi2Nqfgi/HROd0hEUzsop3XOPPLGHrWnsX421mfo8IHNjAdgZNRCALX 4B9VmTjY3D+CT/2/S2zr4DgOmuLFo5H3TLSIK565gmdhctJjgzlgu/+lSIXKjT6EJ107 NXWajeCaIOmhLbOOci0u7xxUhzSfLU8p10ZhSzJrgnITqvXTQMEUOZXZP1FtBUf+o8ng lQBV7Fq0Asf9eZaCHyzTGgxy17BGOTyF+Bm/FVKc39IvFENIQ+5VddPyTxuTmWUCxY/W fa7w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530iu3NeDgErGEjM/X3MQqhIXrlRqOyJaibkIeq53UtYV+3I6yWU mveA2jRZq9W6PucjmUnq3ao1MrQSW2JxfuNo6f4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJymbcTRLj3cdfQ7yzBFDTlPv8vWH8PSc61BRxk5YpOmSQ+P/8HHtN5N6KdrhF/1C3cBQyprhLxzMrMLEwZS/Vg= X-Received: by 2002:a25:24c1:: with SMTP id k184mr2035545ybk.2.1634768355513; Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:19:15 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20211020191526.2306852-1-memxor@gmail.com> <20211020191526.2306852-8-memxor@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20211020191526.2306852-8-memxor@gmail.com> From: Andrii Nakryiko Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 15:19:04 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v4 7/8] selftests/bpf: Fix fd cleanup in sk_lookup test To: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi Cc: bpf , Jakub Sitnicki , Song Liu , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Yonghong Song , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , =?UTF-8?B?VG9rZSBIw7hpbGFuZC1Kw7hyZ2Vuc2Vu?= , Networking Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Oct 20, 2021 at 12:15 PM Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote: > > Similar to the fix in commit: > e31eec77e4ab ("bpf: selftests: Fix fd cleanup in get_branch_snapshot") > > We use designated initializer to set fds to -1 without breaking on > future changes to MAX_SERVER constant denoting the array size. > > The particular close(0) occurs on non-reuseport tests, so it can be seen > with -n 115/{2,3} but not 115/4. This can cause problems with future > tests if they depend on BTF fd never being acquired as fd 0, breaking > internal libbpf assumptions. > > Fixes: 0ab5539f8584 ("selftests/bpf: Tests for BPF_SK_LOOKUP attach point") > Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki > Acked-by: Song Liu > Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_lookup.c | 14 ++++++++------ > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_lookup.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_lookup.c > index aee41547e7f4..cbee46d2d525 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_lookup.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_lookup.c > @@ -598,7 +598,7 @@ static void query_lookup_prog(struct test_sk_lookup *skel) > > static void run_lookup_prog(const struct test *t) > { > - int server_fds[MAX_SERVERS] = { -1 }; > + int server_fds[] = { [0 ... MAX_SERVERS - 1] = -1 }; if you have this, why do you need early break logic below? > int client_fd, reuse_conn_fd = -1; > struct bpf_link *lookup_link; > int i, err; > @@ -663,8 +663,9 @@ static void run_lookup_prog(const struct test *t) > if (reuse_conn_fd != -1) > close(reuse_conn_fd); > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(server_fds); i++) { > - if (server_fds[i] != -1) > - close(server_fds[i]); > + if (server_fds[i] == -1) > + break; > + close(server_fds[i]); > } > bpf_link__destroy(lookup_link); > } > @@ -1053,7 +1054,7 @@ static void run_sk_assign(struct test_sk_lookup *skel, > struct bpf_program *lookup_prog, > const char *remote_ip, const char *local_ip) > { > - int server_fds[MAX_SERVERS] = { -1 }; > + int server_fds[] = { [0 ... MAX_SERVERS - 1] = -1 }; > struct bpf_sk_lookup ctx; > __u64 server_cookie; > int i, err; > @@ -1097,8 +1098,9 @@ static void run_sk_assign(struct test_sk_lookup *skel, > > close_servers: > for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(server_fds); i++) { > - if (server_fds[i] != -1) > - close(server_fds[i]); > + if (server_fds[i] == -1) > + break; > + close(server_fds[i]); > } > } > > -- > 2.33.1 >