BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org
 help / color / Atom feed
From: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: "open list" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Alban Crequy" <alban@kinvolk.io>,
	"Iago López Galeiras" <iago@kinvolk.io>,
	"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
	"Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>,
	"Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>, "Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"Jakub Kicinski" <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
	"Jesper Dangaard Brouer" <hawk@kernel.org>,
	"John Fastabend" <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	"Stanislav Fomichev" <sdf@google.com>,
	Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
	xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [bpf-next v3 11/12] selftests/bpf: Add tests for bpf_prog_test_run for perf events progs
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 19:37:12 +0200
Message-ID: <CAGGp+cGMnumMx+GnKbD_ty1C+UWib70s0oBzqdS-=mA-L0jyHA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEf4BzYaV=AxYZna225qKzyWPteU4YFPiBRE4cO30tYmyN_pJQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Jul 12, 2019 at 2:38 AM Andrii Nakryiko
<andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:42 PM Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io> wrote:
> >
> > The tests check if ctx and data are correctly prepared from ctx_in and
> > data_in, so accessing the ctx and using the bpf_perf_prog_read_value
> > work as expected.
> >
>
> These are x86_64-specific tests, aren't they? Should probably guard
> them behind #ifdef's.

Yeah, they are x86_64 specific, because pt_regs are arch specific. I
was wondering what to do here in the cover letter. Ifdef? Ifdef and
cover also other arches (please no)? Do some weird tricks with
overriding the definition of pt_regs? Else?

>
> > Signed-off-by: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@kinvolk.io>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c   | 48 ++++++++++
> >  .../selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c   | 96 +++++++++++++++++++
> >  2 files changed, 144 insertions(+)
> >  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > index 6f124cc4ee34..484ea8842b06 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> > @@ -295,6 +295,54 @@ static void bpf_fill_scale(struct bpf_test *self)
> >         }
> >  }
> >
> > +static void bpf_fill_perf_event_test_run_check(struct bpf_test *self)
> > +{
> > +       compiletime_assert(
> > +               sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_data) <= TEST_CTX_LEN,
> > +               "buffer for ctx is too short to fit struct bpf_perf_event_data");
> > +       compiletime_assert(
> > +               sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value) <= TEST_DATA_LEN,
> > +               "buffer for data is too short to fit struct bpf_perf_event_value");
> > +
> > +       struct bpf_perf_event_data ctx = {
> > +               .regs = (bpf_user_pt_regs_t) {
> > +                       .r15 = 1,
> > +                       .r14 = 2,
> > +                       .r13 = 3,
> > +                       .r12 = 4,
> > +                       .rbp = 5,
> > +                       .rbx = 6,
> > +                       .r11 = 7,
> > +                       .r10 = 8,
> > +                       .r9 = 9,
> > +                       .r8 = 10,
> > +                       .rax = 11,
> > +                       .rcx = 12,
> > +                       .rdx = 13,
> > +                       .rsi = 14,
> > +                       .rdi = 15,
> > +                       .orig_rax = 16,
> > +                       .rip = 17,
> > +                       .cs = 18,
> > +                       .eflags = 19,
> > +                       .rsp = 20,
> > +                       .ss = 21,
> > +               },
> > +               .sample_period = 1,
> > +               .addr = 2,
> > +       };
> > +       struct bpf_perf_event_value data = {
> > +               .counter = 1,
> > +               .enabled = 2,
> > +               .running = 3,
> > +       };
> > +
> > +       memcpy(self->ctx, &ctx, sizeof(ctx));
> > +       memcpy(self->data, &data, sizeof(data));
>
> Just curious, just assignment didn't work?
>
> > +       free(self->fill_insns);
> > +       self->fill_insns = NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> >  /* BPF_SK_LOOKUP contains 13 instructions, if you need to fix up maps */
> >  #define BPF_SK_LOOKUP(func)                                            \
> >         /* struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {} */                          \
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 000000000000..3f877458a7f8
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c
> > @@ -0,0 +1,96 @@
> > +#define PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(PT_REG_FIELD, VALUE)                  \
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_CTX(offsetof(bpf_user_pt_regs_t, PT_REG_FIELD), VALUE)
> > +#define PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_EVENT(PED_FIELD, VALUE)                     \
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_CTX(offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, PED_FIELD), VALUE)
> > +#define PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_CTX(OFFSET, VALUE)                          \
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_64(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_1, OFFSET, VALUE)
> > +#define PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_VALUE(PEV_FIELD, VALUE)                     \
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_64(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_6, offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_value, PEV_FIELD), VALUE)
>
> Wrap long lines? Try also running scripts/checkpatch.pl again these
> files you are modifying.

Will wrap. Checkpatch was also complaining about complex macro not
being inside parens, but I can't see how to wrap it in parens and keep
it working at the same time.

>
> > +#define PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_64(DST, SRC, OFFSET, VALUE)                 \
> > +       BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, DST, SRC, OFFSET),                          \
> > +       BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, DST, VALUE, 2),                            \
> > +       BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, VALUE),                                \
> > +       BPF_EXIT_INSN()
> > +
> > +{
> > +       "check if regs contain expected values",
> > +       .insns = {
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r15, 1),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r14, 2),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r13, 3),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r12, 4),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rbp, 5),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rbx, 6),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r11, 7),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r10, 8),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r9, 9),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(r8, 10),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rax, 11),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rcx, 12),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rdx, 13),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rsi, 14),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rdi, 15),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(orig_rax, 16),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rip, 17),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(cs, 18),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(eflags, 19),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(rsp, 20),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG(ss, 21),
> > +       BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> > +       BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> > +       },
> > +       .result = ACCEPT,
> > +       .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
> > +       .ctx_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_data),
> > +       .data_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value),
> > +       .fill_helper = bpf_fill_perf_event_test_run_check,
> > +       .override_data_out_len = true,
> > +},
> > +{
> > +       "check if sample period and addr contain expected values",
> > +       .insns = {
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_EVENT(sample_period, 1),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_EVENT(addr, 2),
> > +       BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> > +       BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> > +       },
> > +       .result = ACCEPT,
> > +       .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
> > +       .ctx_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_data),
> > +       .data_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value),
> > +       .fill_helper = bpf_fill_perf_event_test_run_check,
> > +       .override_data_out_len = true,
> > +},
> > +{
> > +       "check if bpf_perf_prog_read_value returns expected data",
> > +       .insns = {
> > +       // allocate space for a struct bpf_perf_event_value
> > +       BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_10),
> > +       BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_6, -(int)sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value)),
> > +       // prepare parameters for bpf_perf_prog_read_value(ctx, struct bpf_perf_event_value*, u32)
> > +       // BPF_REG_1 already contains the context
> > +       BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_6),
> > +       BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value)),
> > +       BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_perf_prog_read_value),
> > +       // check the return value
> > +       BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
> > +       BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> > +       // check if the fields match the expected values
>
> Use /* */ comments.

Oops. Will fix.

>
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_VALUE(counter, 1),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_VALUE(enabled, 2),
> > +       PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_VALUE(running, 3),
> > +       BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> > +       BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> > +       },
> > +       .result = ACCEPT,
> > +       .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT,
> > +       .ctx_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_data),
> > +       .data_len = sizeof(struct bpf_perf_event_value),
> > +       .fill_helper = bpf_fill_perf_event_test_run_check,
> > +       .override_data_out_len = true,
> > +},
> > +#undef PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_64
> > +#undef PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_VALUE
> > +#undef PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_CTX
> > +#undef PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_EVENT
> > +#undef PER_LOAD_AND_CHECK_PTREG
> > --
> > 2.20.1
> >



--
Kinvolk GmbH | Adalbertstr.6a, 10999 Berlin | tel: +491755589364
Geschäftsführer/Directors: Alban Crequy, Chris Kühl, Iago López Galeiras
Registergericht/Court of registration: Amtsgericht Charlottenburg
Registernummer/Registration number: HRB 171414 B
Ust-ID-Nummer/VAT ID number: DE302207000

  reply index

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-07-08 16:31 [bpf-next v3 00/12] Test the 32bit narrow reads Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 01/12] selftests/bpf: Print a message when tester could not run a program Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-10 23:44   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 11:36     ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-12  0:10       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 02/12] selftests/bpf: Avoid a clobbering of errno Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-10 23:51   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 12:04     ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-12  0:59       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-12 17:31         ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 03/12] selftests/bpf: Avoid another case of errno clobbering Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-10 23:57   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 12:05     ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 04/12] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_prog_test_run_xattr Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-11  0:03   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 12:07     ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 05/12] selftests/bpf: Allow passing more information to BPF prog test run Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-11  1:17   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-11 12:17     ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 06/12] selftests/bpf: Make sure that preexisting tests for perf event work Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 07/12] tools headers: Adopt compiletime_assert from kernel sources Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-12  0:19   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 08/12] tools headers: Sync struct bpf_perf_event_data Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-12  0:21   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 09/12] bpf: Split out some helper functions Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-08 16:40   ` Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-11 20:25   ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 10/12] bpf: Implement bpf_prog_test_run for perf event programs Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-11 20:30   ` Stanislav Fomichev
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 11/12] selftests/bpf: Add tests for bpf_prog_test_run for perf events progs Krzesimir Nowak
2019-07-12  0:37   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-12 17:37     ` Krzesimir Nowak [this message]
2019-07-12 17:49       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2019-07-08 16:31 ` [bpf-next v3 12/12] selftests/bpf: Test correctness of narrow 32bit read on 64bit field Krzesimir Nowak

Reply instructions:

You may reply publically 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='CAGGp+cGMnumMx+GnKbD_ty1C+UWib70s0oBzqdS-=mA-L0jyHA@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=krzesimir@kinvolk.io \
    --cc=alban@kinvolk.io \
    --cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=iago@kinvolk.io \
    --cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kafai@fb.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
    --cc=xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=yhs@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

BPF Archive on lore.kernel.org

Archives are clonable:
	git clone --mirror https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/0 bpf/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 bpf bpf/ https://lore.kernel.org/bpf \
		bpf@vger.kernel.org bpf@archiver.kernel.org
	public-inbox-index bpf


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://nntp.lore.kernel.org/org.kernel.vger.bpf


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/ public-inbox