From: Jiong Wang <jiong.wang@netronome.com>
To: Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@gmail.com>
Cc: "Song Liu" <songliubraving@fb.com>,
"Albert Ou" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, "Daniel Borkmann" <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
"Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@gmail.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@sifive.com>,
"Alexei Starovoitov" <ast@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"Yonghong Song" <yhs@fb.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
"Martin KaFai Lau" <kafai@fb.com>, "Xi Wang" <xi.wang@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] bpf: test_bpf: add tests for upper bits of 32-bit operations
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 21:30:33 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lfyn4rdy.fsf@netronome.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190530190800.7633-2-luke.r.nels@gmail.com>
Luke Nelson writes:
> This commit introduces tests that validate the upper 32 bits
> of the result of 32-bit BPF ALU operations.
>
> The existing tests for 32-bit operations do not check the upper 32
> bits of results because the exit instruction truncates the result.
> These tests perform a 32-bit ALU operation followed by a right shift.
> These tests can catch subtle bugs in the extension behavior of JITed
> instructions, including several bugs in the RISC-V BPF JIT, fixed in
> another patch.
Hi Luke,
Have you seen the following?
https://www.spinics.net/lists/netdev/msg573355.html
it has been merged to bpf tree and should have full test coverage of all
bpf insns that could write to sub-register and are exposed to JIT
back-end.
And AFAIK, we add new unit tests to test_verifier which is a userspace
test infrastructure which offers more test functionality plus tests will
go through verifier.
Regards,
Jiong
> The added tests pass the JIT and interpreter on x86, as well as the
> JIT and interpreter of RISC-V once the zero extension bugs were fixed.
>
> Cc: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@gmail.com>
> ---
> lib/test_bpf.c | 164 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 164 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/lib/test_bpf.c b/lib/test_bpf.c
> index 0845f635f404..4580dc0220f1 100644
> --- a/lib/test_bpf.c
> +++ b/lib/test_bpf.c
> @@ -2461,6 +2461,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 1 } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_ADD_X: (1 + 4294967294) >> 32 + 4294967294 = 4294967294",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 1U),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 4294967294U),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, R0, R1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 4294967294U } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_ADD_X: 1 + 2 = 3",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -2812,6 +2826,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 1 } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_SUB_X: (4294967295 - 1) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 4294967295U),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 1U),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_SUB, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, R0, R1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_SUB_X: 3 - 1 = 2",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3391,6 +3419,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 0xffffffff } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_AND_X: (-1 & -1) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, -1UL),
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, -1UL),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_AND, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1U),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_AND_X: 3 & 2 = 2",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3533,6 +3575,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 0xffffffff } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_OR_X: (0 & -1) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0),
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, -1UL),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_OR, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1U),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_OR_X: 1 | 2 = 3",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3675,6 +3731,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 0xfffffffe } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_XOR_X: (0 ^ -1) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0),
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R1, -1UL),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_XOR, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1U),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_XOR_X: 5 ^ 6 = 3",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3817,6 +3887,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 0x80000000 } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_LSH_X: (1 << 31) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 1),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 31),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_LSH, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_LSH_X: 1 << 1 = 2",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3842,6 +3926,19 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { { 0, 0x80000000 } },
> },
> /* BPF_ALU | BPF_LSH | BPF_K */
> + {
> + "ALU_LSH_K: (1 << 31) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 1),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_LSH, R0, 31),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU_LSH_K: 1 << 1 = 2",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3911,6 +4008,20 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 1 } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_RSH_X: (0x80000000 >> 0) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x80000000),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 0),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_RSH, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_RSH_X: 2 >> 1 = 1",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3936,6 +4047,19 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { { 0, 1 } },
> },
> /* BPF_ALU | BPF_RSH | BPF_K */
> + {
> + "ALU_RSH_K: (0x80000000 >> 0) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x80000000),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 0),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU_RSH_K: 2 >> 1 = 1",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -3993,7 +4117,34 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 0xffff00ff } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_ARSH_X: (0x80000000 >> 0) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x80000000),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 0),
> + BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ARSH, R0, R1),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> /* BPF_ALU | BPF_ARSH | BPF_K */
> + {
> + "ALU_ARSH_K: (0x80000000 >> 0) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_LD_IMM64(R0, 0x80000000),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ARSH, R0, 0),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU_ARSH_K: 0xff00ff0000000000 >> 40 = 0xffffffffffff00ff",
> .u.insns_int = {
> @@ -4028,6 +4179,19 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
> { },
> { { 0, 3 } },
> },
> + {
> + "ALU_NEG: -(1) >> 32 + 1 = 1",
> + .u.insns_int = {
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 1),
> + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_NEG, R0, 0),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_RSH, R0, 32),
> + BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, R0, 1),
> + BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
> + },
> + INTERNAL,
> + { },
> + { { 0, 1 } },
> + },
> {
> "ALU64_NEG: -(3) = -3",
> .u.insns_int = {
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-05-30 20:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-05-30 19:07 [PATCH 1/2] bpf, riscv: fix bugs in JIT for 32-bit ALU operations Luke Nelson
2019-05-30 19:08 ` [PATCH 2/2] bpf: test_bpf: add tests for upper bits of 32-bit operations Luke Nelson
2019-05-30 20:30 ` Jiong Wang [this message]
2019-05-30 20:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] bpf, riscv: fix bugs in JIT for 32-bit ALU operations Song Liu
2019-05-30 22:34 ` Luke Nelson
2019-05-30 23:08 ` Song Liu
2019-05-31 7:22 ` Jiong Wang
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=87lfyn4rdy.fsf@netronome.com \
--to=jiong.wang@netronome.com \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bjorn.topel@gmail.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=luke.r.nels@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@sifive.com \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=xi.wang@gmail.com \
--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).