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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_GIT autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64E75C606BD for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:33:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36FF421479 for ; Mon, 8 Jul 2019 16:33:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=kinvolk.io header.i=@kinvolk.io header.b="h+vDB2Gh" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730550AbfGHQdC (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 12:33:02 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f65.google.com ([209.85.221.65]:35945 "EHLO mail-wr1-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728834AbfGHQbs (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Jul 2019 12:31:48 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f65.google.com with SMTP id n4so17883841wrs.3 for ; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 09:31:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kinvolk.io; s=google; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3v7kORJZf9psv+vA5sP8DDz4yEImqLDpanBLVAEtpNU=; b=h+vDB2GhO2QOH0ZIG4dCQmb5vRQ9v6u24r5+jkrep/I+SiggmwNdaTIVIz3NzF9zl7 FsijVoW+As30PTmh3MEDhrWRipHg2nqc7cnPc+bilJDRsdyBubyYW9eS3A0zbnJmqp7s tGv3zVBa7/+8fJYPnzcxoqEoZ9OJRRINNVzC8= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=3v7kORJZf9psv+vA5sP8DDz4yEImqLDpanBLVAEtpNU=; b=PZF5b2WulTveu3mLKLTYuHpvv/F3boNVltYNmRM6iX6u7eJl7fArsMYusbQ0uhiIDs 2nnqNxfM8ENCEBjg8y48sgpTRe9dx9jqkh7RoOKTa3Exo+uZ0UjBM17dZ4YhdxgovhDX UnwMbBchvci52SvHc6TkZtt9NiMGwiDrgSTTyXMMAKjviYLCRybKMAwyBLabcXXjNmkB 9H63VA0UGIUOyyr8ZtiNMQwv1Krb/jDkTM749ntnW3j2sf6GZT/rs74lFvrOclCgXZDP KAnrnZqy5QZEdDkmycufxKdxsmHXzutFIRzK4zpvyaRVjnjoLc4+gadJNSD1qzGpFLFt 8Awg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUgF+bevfY8ehn1+K1394HYFMuMARXn1Qn/O3pRFUH8fvcXmlOJ BSBGzywossDTOope7S2Sy91tb/bBwpk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwP59KT50EM58K8Q4RqceI+LJyhV6rCtNfYHeHIqZFRu9Qe+ZURKr4E35fmQBJc7F8zSo4sQA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:53c2:: with SMTP id a2mr18587648wrw.8.1562603506249; Mon, 08 Jul 2019 09:31:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (ip5f5aedbe.dynamic.kabel-deutschland.de. [95.90.237.190]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e6sm18255086wrw.23.2019.07.08.09.31.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 08 Jul 2019 09:31:45 -0700 (PDT) From: Krzesimir Nowak To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Alban Crequy , =?UTF-8?q?Iago=20L=C3=B3pez=20Galeiras?= , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , Yonghong Song , "David S. Miller" , Jakub Kicinski , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , John Fastabend , Stanislav Fomichev , netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org, Krzesimir Nowak Subject: [bpf-next v3 00/12] Test the 32bit narrow reads Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 18:31:09 +0200 Message-Id: <20190708163121.18477-1-krzesimir@kinvolk.io> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org These patches try to test the fix made in commit e2f7fc0ac695 ("bpf: fix undefined behavior in narrow load handling"). The problem existed in the generated BPF bytecode that was doing a 32bit narrow read of a 64bit field, so to test it the code would need to be executed. Currently the only such field exists in BPF_PROG_TYPE_PERF_EVENT, which was not supported by bpf_prog_test_run(). I'm sending these patches to bpf-next now as they introduce a new feature. But maybe some of those patches could go to the bpf branch? There is a bit of yak shaving to do for the test to be run: 1. Print why the program could not be run (patch 1). 2. Some fixes for errno clobbering (patches 2 and 3). 3. Using bpf_prog_test_run_xattr, so I can pass ctx_in stuff too (patch 4). 4. Adding ctx stuff and data out size override to struct bpf_test, and use them for the perf event tests (patches 5 and 6). 5. Some tools headers syncing (patches 7 and 8). 6. Split out some useful functions for bpf_prog_test_run implementation out of the net/bpf/test_run.c (patch 9) 7. Implement bpf_prog_test_run for perf event programs and test it (patches 10 and 11). The last point is where I'm least sure how things should be done properly: 1. There is a bunch of stuff to prepare for the bpf_perf_prog_read_value to work, and that stuff is very hacky. I would welcome some hints about how to set up the perf_event and perf_sample_data structs in a way that is a bit more future-proof than just setting some fields in a specific way, so some other code won't use some other fields (like setting event.oncpu to -1 to avoid event.pmu to be used for reading the value of the event). 2. The tests try to see if the test run for perf event sets up the context properly, so they verify the struct pt_regs contents. They way it is currently written Works For Me, but surely it won't work on other arch. So what would be the way forward? Just put the test case inside #ifdef __x86_64__? 3. Another thing in tests - I'm trying to make sure that the bpf_perf_prog_read_value helper works as it seems to be the only bpf perf helper that takes the ctx as a parameter. Is that enough or I should test other helpers too? About the test itself - I'm not sure if it will work on a big endian machine. I think it should, but I don't have anything handy here to verify it. Krzesimir Nowak (12): selftests/bpf: Print a message when tester could not run a program selftests/bpf: Avoid a clobbering of errno selftests/bpf: Avoid another case of errno clobbering selftests/bpf: Use bpf_prog_test_run_xattr selftests/bpf: Allow passing more information to BPF prog test run selftests/bpf: Make sure that preexisting tests for perf event work tools headers: Adopt compiletime_assert from kernel sources tools headers: Sync struct bpf_perf_event_data bpf: Split out some helper functions bpf: Implement bpf_prog_test_run for perf event programs selftests/bpf: Add tests for bpf_prog_test_run for perf events progs selftests/bpf: Test correctness of narrow 32bit read on 64bit field include/linux/bpf.h | 28 ++ kernel/bpf/Makefile | 1 + kernel/bpf/test_run.c | 212 ++++++++++++++ kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c | 60 ++++ net/bpf/test_run.c | 263 +++++------------- tools/include/linux/compiler.h | 28 ++ tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf_perf_event.h | 1 + tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 197 ++++++++++++- .../selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c | 96 +++++++ .../bpf/verifier/perf_event_sample_period.c | 4 + .../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/var_off.c | 21 ++ 11 files changed, 700 insertions(+), 211 deletions(-) create mode 100644 kernel/bpf/test_run.c create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/perf_event_run.c -- 2.20.1