kernel/linux.git/tools/testing/selftests/bpf, branch v4.19.237

selftests/bpf: Fix fclose/pclose mismatch in test_progs

2021-11-26T10:36:11+00:00

[ Upstream commit f48ad69097fe79d1de13c4d8fef556d4c11c5e68 ] Make sure to use pclose() to properly close the pipe opened by popen(). Fixes: 81f77fd0deeb ("bpf: add selftest for stackmap with BPF_F_STACK_BUILD_ID") Signed-off-by: Andrea Righi Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: Shuah Khan Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211026143409.42666-1-andrea.righi@canonical.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

selftests/bpf: Enlarge select() timeout for test_maps

2021-09-22T09:48:08+00:00

[ Upstream commit 2d82d73da35b72b53fe0d96350a2b8d929d07e42 ] 0Day robot observed that it's easily timeout on a heavy load host. ------------------- # selftests: bpf: test_maps # Fork 1024 tasks to 'test_update_delete' # Fork 1024 tasks to 'test_update_delete' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_hashmap' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_hashmap_percpu' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_hashmap_sizes' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_hashmap_walk' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_arraymap' # Fork 100 tasks to 'test_arraymap_percpu' # Failed sockmap unexpected timeout not ok 3 selftests: bpf: test_maps # exit=1 # selftests: bpf: test_lru_map # nr_cpus:8 ------------------- Since this test will be scheduled by 0Day to a random host that could have only a few cpus(2-8), enlarge the timeout to avoid a false NG report. In practice, i tried to pin it to only one cpu by 'taskset 0x01 ./test_maps', and knew 10S is likely enough, but i still perfer to a larger value 30. Reported-by: kernel test robot Signed-off-by: Li Zhijian Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Acked-by: Song Liu Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210820015556.23276-2-lizhijian@cn.fujitsu.com Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin

selftests/bpf: fix tests due to const spill/fill

2021-09-22T09:47:58+00:00

commit fc559a70d57c6ee5443f7a750858503e94cdc941 upstream. fix tests that incorrectly assumed that the verifier cannot track constants through stack. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann [OP: backport to 4.19] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

selftests/bpf: Test variable offset stack access

2021-09-22T09:47:58+00:00

commit 8ff80e96e3ccea5ff0a890d4f18997e0344dbec2 upstream. Test different scenarios of indirect variable-offset stack access: out of bound access (>0), min_off below initialized part of the stack, max_off+size above initialized part of the stack, initialized stack. Example of output: ... #856/p indirect variable-offset stack access, out of bound OK #857/p indirect variable-offset stack access, max_off+size > max_initialized OK #858/p indirect variable-offset stack access, min_off < min_initialized OK #859/p indirect variable-offset stack access, ok OK ... Signed-off-by: Andrey Ignatov Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov [OP: backport to 4.19] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: correct slot_type marking logic to allow more stack slot sharing

2021-09-22T09:47:58+00:00

commit 0bae2d4d62d523f06ff1a8e88ce38b45400acd28 upstream. Verifier is supposed to support sharing stack slot allocated to ptr with SCALAR_VALUE for privileged program. However this doesn't happen for some cases. The reason is verifier is not clearing slot_type STACK_SPILL for all bytes, it only clears part of them, while verifier is using: slot_type[0] == STACK_SPILL as a convention to check one slot is ptr type. So, the consequence of partial clearing slot_type is verifier could treat a partially overridden ptr slot, which should now be a SCALAR_VALUE slot, still as ptr slot, and rejects some valid programs. Before this patch, test_xdp_noinline.o under bpf selftests, bpf_lxc.o and bpf_netdev.o under Cilium bpf repo, when built with -mattr=+alu32 are rejected due to this issue. After this patch, they all accepted. There is no processed insn number change before and after this patch on Cilium bpf programs. Reviewed-by: Jakub Kicinski Signed-off-by: Jiong Wang Reviewed-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov [OP: adjusted context for 4.19] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf, selftests: Adjust few selftest outcomes wrt unreachable code

2021-08-15T11:05:04+00:00

commit 973377ffe8148180b2651825b92ae91988141b05 upstream. In almost all cases from test_verifier that have been changed in here, we've had an unreachable path with a load from a register which has an invalid address on purpose. This was basically to make sure that we never walk this path and to have the verifier complain if it would otherwise. Change it to match on the right error for unprivileged given we now test these paths under speculative execution. There's one case where we match on exact # of insns_processed. Due to the extra path, this will of course mismatch on unprivileged. Thus, restrict the test->insn_processed check to privileged-only. In one other case, we result in a 'pointer comparison prohibited' error. This is similarly due to verifying an 'invalid' branch where we end up with a value pointer on one side of the comparison. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Reviewed-by: John Fastabend Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov [OP: ignore changes to tests that do not exist in 4.19] Signed-off-by: Ovidiu Panait Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

selftests/bpf: Avoid running unprivileged tests with alignment requirements

2021-06-10T11:24:08+00:00

commit c77b0589ca29ad1859fe7d7c1ecd63c0632379fa upstream Some architectures have strict alignment requirements. In that case, the BPF verifier detects if a program has unaligned accesses and rejects them. A user can pass BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT to a program to override this check. That, however, will only work when a privileged user loads a program. An unprivileged user loading a program with this flag will be rejected prior entering the verifier. Hence, it does not make sense to load unprivileged programs without strict alignment when testing the verifier. This patch avoids exactly that. Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko Acked-by: Luke Nelson Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20201118071640.83773-3-bjorn.topel@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

selftests/bpf: add "any alignment" annotation for some tests

2021-06-10T11:24:08+00:00

commit e2c6f50e48849298bed694de03cceb537d95cdc4 upstream RISC-V does, in-general, not have "efficient unaligned access". When testing the RISC-V BPF JIT, some selftests failed in the verification due to misaligned access. Annotate these tests with the F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS flag. Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Apply F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS to more ACCEPT test cases.

2021-06-10T11:24:08+00:00

commit 0a68632488aa0129ed530af9ae9e8573f5650812 upstream If a testcase has alignment problems but is expected to be ACCEPT, verify it using F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS too. Maybe in the future if we add some architecture specific code to elide the unaligned memory access warnings during the test, we can execute these as well. Signed-off-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman

bpf: Make more use of 'any' alignment in test_verifier.c

2021-06-10T11:24:08+00:00

commit 2acc5fd5b8c25df0de7f3c8b8e385f5c6f8202ec upstream Use F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS in more tests where the expected result is REJECT. Signed-off-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman