linux-kselftest.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@huawei.com>
To: <ast@kernel.org>, <daniel@iogearbox.net>, <andrii@kernel.org>,
	<martin.lau@linux.dev>, <song@kernel.org>, <yhs@fb.com>,
	<john.fastabend@gmail.com>, <kpsingh@kernel.org>,
	<sdf@google.com>, <haoluo@google.com>, <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	<illusionist.neo@gmail.com>, <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
	<davem@davemloft.net>, <edumazet@google.com>, <kuba@kernel.org>,
	<pabeni@redhat.com>, <mykolal@fb.com>, <shuah@kernel.org>,
	<benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com>, <memxor@gmail.com>,
	<delyank@fb.com>, <asavkov@redhat.com>, <colin.i.king@gmail.com>,
	<bpf@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>
Cc: <yangjihong1@huawei.com>
Subject: [PATCH 4/4] bpf:selftests: Add kfunc_call test for mixing 32-bit and 64-bit parameters
Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2022 16:32:54 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221103083254.237646-5-yangjihong1@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221103083254.237646-1-yangjihong1@huawei.com>

for function foo(u32 a, u64 b, u32 c) in 32-bit ARM: a is in r0, b is in
r2-r3, c is stored on the stack.
Because the AAPCS states:
"A double-word sized type is passed in two consecutive registers (e.g., r0
and r1, or r2 and r3). The content of the registers is as if the value had
been loaded from memory representation with a single LDM instruction."
Supplement the test cases in this case.

Signed-off-by: Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@huawei.com>
---
 net/bpf/test_run.c                            |  6 +++++
 .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c     |  1 +
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c     | 23 +++++++++++++++++++
 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+)

diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c
index 13d578ce2a09..bdfb3081e1ce 100644
--- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
+++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
@@ -551,6 +551,11 @@ struct sock * noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test3(struct sock *sk)
 	return sk;
 }
 
+u64 noinline bpf_kfunc_call_test4(struct sock *sk, u64 a, u64 b, u32 c, u32 d)
+{
+	return a + b + c + d;
+}
+
 struct prog_test_member1 {
 	int a;
 };
@@ -739,6 +744,7 @@ BTF_SET8_START(test_sk_check_kfunc_ids)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test1)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test2)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test3)
+BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test4)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_memb_acquire, KF_ACQUIRE | KF_RET_NULL)
 BTF_ID_FLAGS(func, bpf_kfunc_call_test_release, KF_RELEASE)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
index 5af1ee8f0e6e..13a105bb05ed 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/kfunc_call.c
@@ -72,6 +72,7 @@ static struct kfunc_test_params kfunc_tests[] = {
 	/* success cases */
 	TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test1, 12),
 	TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test2, 3),
+	TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test4, 16),
 	TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test_ref_btf_id, 0),
 	TC_TEST(kfunc_call_test_get_mem, 42),
 	SYSCALL_TEST(kfunc_syscall_test, 0),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c
index f636e50be259..7cccb014d26e 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/kfunc_call_test.c
@@ -6,6 +6,8 @@
 extern int bpf_kfunc_call_test2(struct sock *sk, __u32 a, __u32 b) __ksym;
 extern __u64 bpf_kfunc_call_test1(struct sock *sk, __u32 a, __u64 b,
 				  __u32 c, __u64 d) __ksym;
+extern __u64 bpf_kfunc_call_test4(struct sock *sk, __u64 a, __u64 b,
+				  __u32 c, __u32 d) __ksym;
 
 extern struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *bpf_kfunc_call_test_acquire(unsigned long *sp) __ksym;
 extern void bpf_kfunc_call_test_release(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p) __ksym;
@@ -17,6 +19,27 @@ extern void bpf_kfunc_call_test_mem_len_fail2(__u64 *mem, int len) __ksym;
 extern int *bpf_kfunc_call_test_get_rdwr_mem(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p, const int rdwr_buf_size) __ksym;
 extern int *bpf_kfunc_call_test_get_rdonly_mem(struct prog_test_ref_kfunc *p, const int rdonly_buf_size) __ksym;
 
+SEC("tc")
+int kfunc_call_test4(struct __sk_buff *skb)
+{
+	struct bpf_sock *sk = skb->sk;
+	__u64 a = 1ULL << 32;
+	__u32 ret;
+
+	if (!sk)
+		return -1;
+
+	sk = bpf_sk_fullsock(sk);
+	if (!sk)
+		return -1;
+
+	a = bpf_kfunc_call_test4((struct sock *)sk, a | 2, a | 3, 4, 5);
+	ret = a >> 32;   /* ret should be 2 */
+	ret += (__u32)a; /* ret should be 16 */
+
+	return ret;
+}
+
 SEC("tc")
 int kfunc_call_test2(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
-- 
2.30.GIT


      parent reply	other threads:[~2022-11-03  8:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-11-03  8:32 [PATCH 0/4] bpf: Support kernel function call in 32-bit ARM Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  8:32 ` [PATCH 1/4] bpf: Adapt 32-bit return value kfunc for 32-bit ARM when zext extension Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  8:32 ` [PATCH 2/4] bpf: Remove size check for sk in bpf_skb_is_valid_access for 32-bit architecture Yang Jihong
2022-11-04 21:56   ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-11-04 23:32     ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-11-08  1:07       ` Andrii Nakryiko
2022-11-08  2:28         ` Martin KaFai Lau
2022-11-03  8:32 ` [PATCH 3/4] bpf: Add kernel function call support in 32-bit ARM Yang Jihong
2022-11-03  8:32 ` Yang Jihong [this message]

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=20221103083254.237646-5-yangjihong1@huawei.com \
    --to=yangjihong1@huawei.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=asavkov@redhat.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=benjamin.tissoires@redhat.com \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=colin.i.king@gmail.com \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=delyank@fb.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=haoluo@google.com \
    --cc=illusionist.neo@gmail.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@armlinux.org.uk \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=memxor@gmail.com \
    --cc=mykolal@fb.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=sdf@google.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=song@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
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).