From patchwork Fri May 15 19:49:03 2020 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Stanislav Fomichev X-Patchwork-Id: 219149 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=-17.4 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, INCLUDES_PATCH, MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SIGNED_OFF_BY, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_GIT, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=unavailable 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 0A5CEC433DF for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 19:49:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D475120709 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 19:49:12 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=google.com header.i=@google.com header.b="aeu6q1m7" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726525AbgEOTtJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2020 15:49:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56738 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726204AbgEOTtG (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 May 2020 15:49:06 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb49.google.com (mail-yb1-xb49.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b49]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C9894C05BD09 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:49:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb49.google.com with SMTP id z7so3405614ybn.21 for ; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:49:06 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:message-id:mime-version:subject:from:to:cc; bh=0lx4/muAj6zHL5hlNrQDx8C/+BhbmUkBZUFKAjLFg14=; b=aeu6q1m7nVHL3PgmuMxmXvACbigIfstLfKme6Y8xFp+EQV0WxXxrEXWpu2YB1cKvEg 7G0gJVWh7sgGEJH0VGAZRjn17cDmDBwEUjoLW/FlO3Qm362+n9w1Zkgbg1N/sQvgGqFQ 3FTPYPvZTH0d4fkvAtfcDDu9KcNBAxOWnB6U4CzVN66NVcMKy4lWWiw2UPJJJRBLx4rL 4OiHiVC+h4MRCY4MdzLjcG0bVbvccKoWAQagm8kzGTKJmO9ShwrAquxQHrj0F9u+8B6r enBu8nBouFvRjR3USPbQa3pOyS1q36mIQoIVn37UHxB+S4UXUuxKMoE+sPBoqXMRsqf9 9CQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:message-id:mime-version:subject:from:to:cc; bh=0lx4/muAj6zHL5hlNrQDx8C/+BhbmUkBZUFKAjLFg14=; b=MrwHdBzqQaPq2grp3Qa0QmcWV92cRjiafKlWTSXntEzdPzTlkxYf+OIg0ntPnXJfWy LgnubXbMvOUGttgVsEaNkxBtSZmT9Q3pO2HDuVzPi/Bgq9N0FTIL0h0+SsJId3cl2ALK C12P+JhfOyaPkbAqi1/2JW70anw/diBMu3+QqgkM7DgDRVM4p9GK4eGwzirliyv8C7gI O3/H30y0YAoaECL4utKtQ596iooNJ4gfJ8yOH2YsGjnAqHm6m3Mr374er92BmW6m8BNS t+6xLOj+XsJB/caETHVPFm2wObMPwPpuHBJKyJjTwEUet/y7tGh/nAa41RX1fHQjm+2P GrmQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5328IAwSEx3drAccY+dQTGwCUzPm05/t5yC+yYQspZqzvE3bJaSz b+521Fiqy7knON+5zBPPzpZx3AFtK8lx5YeLvoU/wU1luhVD/QFZwgRYrsVfy+8AQTQLSduhIN6 /xHvF/Lv2IyWJaa3mkqxL4uqIZVhLOBuOninv+D23gkRregjT5Pxa8Q== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw9asfw462ApaggfcGn4vZ/mEZjRo7LyirHwmtnRYAHg6ZQGiHUtpOjU2BZjn9W7NvMXlghgZ8= X-Received: by 2002:a25:bc8d:: with SMTP id e13mr8575945ybk.67.1589572145960; Fri, 15 May 2020 12:49:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 15 May 2020 12:49:03 -0700 Message-Id: <20200515194904.229296-1-sdf@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.26.2.761.g0e0b3e54be-goog Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] selftests/bpf: fix test_align From: Stanislav Fomichev To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Cc: davem@davemloft.net, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, Stanislav Fomichev , John Fastabend Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Commit 294f2fc6da27 ("bpf: Verifer, adjust_scalar_min_max_vals to always call update_reg_bounds()") changed the way verifier logs some of its state, adjust the test_align accordingly. Where possible, I tried to not copy-paste the entire log line and resorted to dropping the last closing brace instead. Fixes: 294f2fc6da27 ("bpf: Verifer, adjust_scalar_min_max_vals to always call update_reg_bounds()") Cc: John Fastabend Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c | 41 ++++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 21 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c index 0262f7b374f9..c9c9bdce9d6d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c @@ -359,15 +359,15 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { * is still (4n), fixed offset is not changed. * Also, we create a new reg->id. */ - {29, "R5_w=pkt(id=4,off=18,r=0,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc))"}, + {29, "R5_w=pkt(id=4,off=18,r=0,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc)"}, /* At the time the word size load is performed from R5, * its total fixed offset is NET_IP_ALIGN + reg->off (18) * which is 20. Then the variable offset is (4n), so * the total offset is 4-byte aligned and meets the * load's requirements. */ - {33, "R4=pkt(id=4,off=22,r=22,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc))"}, - {33, "R5=pkt(id=4,off=18,r=22,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc))"}, + {33, "R4=pkt(id=4,off=22,r=22,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc)"}, + {33, "R5=pkt(id=4,off=18,r=22,umax_value=2040,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc)"}, }, }, { @@ -410,15 +410,15 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { /* Adding 14 makes R6 be (4n+2) */ {9, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, /* Packet pointer has (4n+2) offset */ - {11, "R5_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, - {13, "R4=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, + {11, "R5_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc)"}, + {13, "R4=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc)"}, /* At the time the word size load is performed from R5, * its total fixed offset is NET_IP_ALIGN + reg->off (0) * which is 2. Then the variable offset is (4n+2), so * the total offset is 4-byte aligned and meets the * load's requirements. */ - {15, "R5=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=4,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, + {15, "R5=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=4,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc)"}, /* Newly read value in R6 was shifted left by 2, so has * known alignment of 4. */ @@ -426,15 +426,15 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { /* Added (4n) to packet pointer's (4n+2) var_off, giving * another (4n+2). */ - {19, "R5_w=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc))"}, - {21, "R4=pkt(id=2,off=4,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc))"}, + {19, "R5_w=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc)"}, + {21, "R4=pkt(id=2,off=4,r=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc)"}, /* At the time the word size load is performed from R5, * its total fixed offset is NET_IP_ALIGN + reg->off (0) * which is 2. Then the variable offset is (4n+2), so * the total offset is 4-byte aligned and meets the * load's requirements. */ - {23, "R5=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=4,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc))"}, + {23, "R5=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=4,umin_value=14,umax_value=2054,var_off=(0x2; 0xffc)"}, }, }, { @@ -469,16 +469,16 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { .matches = { {4, "R5_w=pkt_end(id=0,off=0,imm=0)"}, /* (ptr - ptr) << 2 == unknown, (4n) */ - {6, "R5_w=inv(id=0,smax_value=9223372036854775804,umax_value=18446744073709551612,var_off=(0x0; 0xfffffffffffffffc))"}, + {6, "R5_w=inv(id=0,smax_value=9223372036854775804,umax_value=18446744073709551612,var_off=(0x0; 0xfffffffffffffffc)"}, /* (4n) + 14 == (4n+2). We blow our bounds, because * the add could overflow. */ - {7, "R5_w=inv(id=0,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc))"}, + {7, "R5_w=inv(id=0,smin_value=-9223372036854775806,smax_value=9223372036854775806,umin_value=2,umax_value=18446744073709551614,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc)"}, /* Checked s>=0 */ - {9, "R5=inv(id=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"}, + {9, "R5=inv(id=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372034707292158,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fffffff7ffffffc)"}, /* packet pointer + nonnegative (4n+2) */ - {11, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"}, - {13, "R4_w=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"}, + {11, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372034707292158,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fffffff7ffffffc)"}, + {13, "R4_w=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372034707292158,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fffffff7ffffffc)"}, /* NET_IP_ALIGN + (4n+2) == (4n), alignment is fine. * We checked the bounds, but it might have been able * to overflow if the packet pointer started in the @@ -486,7 +486,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { * So we did not get a 'range' on R6, and the access * attempt will fail. */ - {15, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"}, + {15, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372034707292158,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fffffff7ffffffc)"}, } }, { @@ -528,7 +528,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { /* New unknown value in R7 is (4n) */ {11, "R7_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1020,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fc))"}, /* Subtracting it from R6 blows our unsigned bounds */ - {12, "R6=inv(id=0,smin_value=-1006,smax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc))"}, + {12, "R6=inv(id=0,smin_value=-1006,smax_value=1034,umin_value=2,umax_value=18446744073709551614,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc)"}, /* Checked s>= 0 */ {14, "R6=inv(id=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, /* At the time the word size load is performed from R5, @@ -537,7 +537,8 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { * the total offset is 4-byte aligned and meets the * load's requirements. */ - {20, "R5=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=4,umin_value=2,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, + {20, "R5=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=4,umin_value=2,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc)"}, + }, }, { @@ -579,18 +580,18 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = { /* Adding 14 makes R6 be (4n+2) */ {11, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=74,var_off=(0x2; 0x7c))"}, /* Subtracting from packet pointer overflows ubounds */ - {13, "R5_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=8,umin_value=18446744073709551542,umax_value=18446744073709551602,var_off=(0xffffffffffffff82; 0x7c))"}, + {13, "R5_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=8,umin_value=18446744073709551542,umax_value=18446744073709551602,var_off=(0xffffffffffffff82; 0x7c)"}, /* New unknown value in R7 is (4n), >= 76 */ {15, "R7_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=76,umax_value=1096,var_off=(0x0; 0x7fc))"}, /* Adding it to packet pointer gives nice bounds again */ - {16, "R5_w=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=1082,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, + {16, "R5_w=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=1082,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffc)"}, /* At the time the word size load is performed from R5, * its total fixed offset is NET_IP_ALIGN + reg->off (0) * which is 2. Then the variable offset is (4n+2), so * the total offset is 4-byte aligned and meets the * load's requirements. */ - {20, "R5=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=4,umin_value=2,umax_value=1082,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"}, + {20, "R5=pkt(id=2,off=0,r=4,umin_value=2,umax_value=1082,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffc)"}, }, }, };