[PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix ct status check in bpf_nf selftests

[PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix ct status check in bpf_nf selftests

[Lorenzo Bianconi]

Check properly the connection tracking entry status configured running
bpf_ct_change_status kfunc.
Remove unnecessary IPS_CONFIRMED status configuration since it is
already done during entry allocation.

Fixes: 6eb7fba007a7 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for new nf_conntrack kfuncs")
Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c | 4 ++--
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 8 +++++---
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
index 544bf90ac2a7..903d16e3abed 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
@@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
 	/* allow some tolerance for test_delta_timeout value to avoid races. */
 	ASSERT_GT(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 8, "Test for min ct timeout update");
 	ASSERT_LE(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 10, "Test for max ct timeout update");
-	/* expected status is IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
-	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 2, "Test for ct status update ");
+	/* expected status is IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
+	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 0xa, "Test for ct status update ");
 	ASSERT_EQ(skel->data->test_exist_lookup, 0, "Test existing connection lookup");
 	ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_exist_lookup_mark, 43, "Test existing connection lookup ctmark");
 end:
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
index 2722441850cc..a3b9d32d1555 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
@@ -143,7 +143,6 @@ nf_ct_test(struct nf_conn *(*lookup_fn)(void *, struct bpf_sock_tuple *, u32,
 		struct nf_conn *ct_ins;
 
 		bpf_ct_set_timeout(ct, 10000);
-		bpf_ct_set_status(ct, IPS_CONFIRMED);
 
 		ct_ins = bpf_ct_insert_entry(ct);
 		if (ct_ins) {
@@ -156,8 +155,11 @@ nf_ct_test(struct nf_conn *(*lookup_fn)(void *, struct bpf_sock_tuple *, u32,
 				bpf_ct_change_timeout(ct_lk, 10000);
 				test_delta_timeout = ct_lk->timeout - bpf_jiffies64();
 				test_delta_timeout /= CONFIG_HZ;
-				test_status = IPS_SEEN_REPLY;
-				bpf_ct_change_status(ct_lk, IPS_SEEN_REPLY);
+
+				bpf_ct_change_status(ct_lk,
+						     IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY);
+				test_status = ct_lk->status;
+
 				bpf_ct_release(ct_lk);
 				test_succ_lookup = 0;
 			}
-- 
2.37.3

Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix ct status check in bpf_nf selftests

[Song Liu]

On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 3:56 AM Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> Check properly the connection tracking entry status configured running
> bpf_ct_change_status kfunc.
> Remove unnecessary IPS_CONFIRMED status configuration since it is
> already done during entry allocation.
>
> Fixes: 6eb7fba007a7 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for new nf_conntrack kfuncs")
> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c | 4 ++--
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 8 +++++---
>  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> index 544bf90ac2a7..903d16e3abed 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
>         /* allow some tolerance for test_delta_timeout value to avoid races. */
>         ASSERT_GT(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 8, "Test for min ct timeout update");
>         ASSERT_LE(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 10, "Test for max ct timeout update");
> -       /* expected status is IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> -       ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 2, "Test for ct status update ");
> +       /* expected status is IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> +       ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 0xa, "Test for ct status update ");

Why do we use 0xa instead of IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY?
To avoid dependency on the header file?

Thanks,
Song

Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: fix ct status check in bpf_nf selftests

[Lorenzo Bianconi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1757 bytes --]

> On Wed, Sep 7, 2022 at 3:56 AM Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Check properly the connection tracking entry status configured running
> > bpf_ct_change_status kfunc.
> > Remove unnecessary IPS_CONFIRMED status configuration since it is
> > already done during entry allocation.
> >
> > Fixes: 6eb7fba007a7 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for new nf_conntrack kfuncs")
> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c | 4 ++--
> >  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 8 +++++---
> >  2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > index 544bf90ac2a7..903d16e3abed 100644
> > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> > @@ -111,8 +111,8 @@ static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
> >         /* allow some tolerance for test_delta_timeout value to avoid races. */
> >         ASSERT_GT(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 8, "Test for min ct timeout update");
> >         ASSERT_LE(skel->bss->test_delta_timeout, 10, "Test for max ct timeout update");
> > -       /* expected status is IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> > -       ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 2, "Test for ct status update ");
> > +       /* expected status is IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
> > +       ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 0xa, "Test for ct status update ");
> 
> Why do we use 0xa instead of IPS_CONFIRMED | IPS_SEEN_REPLY?
> To avoid dependency on the header file?

nope, thx for reporting it. I will fix it in v2.

Regards,
Lorenzo

> 
> Thanks,
> Song

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]