IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
The BPF JITs now support cpuv4 instructions. Add tests for these new
instructions to the test suite:
1. Sign extended Load
2. Sign extended Mov
3. Unconditional byte swap
4. Unconditional jump with 32-bit offset
5. Signed division and modulo
Signed-off-by: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230907230550.1417590-9-puranjay12@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
If a testcase returns a wrong (unexpected) value, print the expected and
returned value in hex notation in addition to the decimal notation.
This is very useful in tests which bit-shift hex values left or right and
helped me a lot while developing the JIT compiler for the hppa architecture.
Additionally fix two typos: dowrd -> dword, tall calls -> tail calls.
Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/ZN6ZAAVoWZpsD1Jf@p100
generate_test_data() acquires a page with alloc_page(GFP_KERNEL).
The GFP_KERNEL is typical for kernel-internal allocations. The
caller requires ZONE_NORMAL or a lower zone for direct access.
Therefore the page cannot come from ZONE_HIGHMEM. Thus there's no
need to map it with kmap().
Also, the kmap() is being deprecated in favor of kmap_local_page() [1].
Hence, use a plain page_address() directly.
Since the page passed to the page_address() is not from the highmem
zone, the page_address() function will always return a valid kernel
virtual address and will not return NULL. Hence, remove the check
'if (!ptr)'.
Remove the unused variable 'ptr' and label 'err_free_page'.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220813220034.806698-1-ira.weiny@intel.com/
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Suggested-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Sumitra Sharma <sumitraartsy@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Reviewed-by: Fabio M. De Francesco <fmdefrancesco@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Ira Weiny <ira.weiny@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230623151644.GA434468@sumitra.com
skb->vlan_present seems redundant.
We can instead derive it from this boolean expression:
vlan_present = skb->vlan_proto != 0 || skb->vlan_tci != 0
Add a new union, to access both fields in a single load/store
when possible.
union {
u32 vlan_all;
struct {
__be16 vlan_proto;
__u16 vlan_tci;
};
};
This allows following patch to remove a conditional test in GRO stack.
Note:
We move remcsum_offload to keep TC_AT_INGRESS_MASK
and SKB_MONO_DELIVERY_TIME_MASK unchanged.
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Acked-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Add test case to enusre that the caller and callee's fp offsets are
correct during tail call (mainly asserting for arm64 JIT).
Tested on both big-endian and little-endian arm64 qemu, result:
test_bpf: Summary: 1026 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [1014/1014 JIT'ed]
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 10 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [10/10 JIT'ed]
test_bpf: test_skb_segment: Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 FAILED
Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220321152852.2334294-6-xukuohai@huawei.com
In the current code, the actual max tail call count is 33 which is greater
than MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT (defined as 32). The actual limit is not consistent
with the meaning of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT and thus confusing at first glance.
We can see the historical evolution from commit 04fd61ab36 ("bpf: allow
bpf programs to tail-call other bpf programs") and commit f9dabe016b
("bpf: Undo off-by-one in interpreter tail call count limit"). In order
to avoid changing existing behavior, the actual limit is 33 now, this is
reasonable.
After commit 874be05f52 ("bpf, tests: Add tail call test suite"), we can
see there exists failed testcase.
On all archs when CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set:
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf
# dmesg | grep -w FAIL
Tail call error path, max count reached jited:0 ret 34 != 33 FAIL
On some archs:
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf
# dmesg | grep -w FAIL
Tail call error path, max count reached jited:1 ret 34 != 33 FAIL
Although the above failed testcase has been fixed in commit 18935a72eb
("bpf/tests: Fix error in tail call limit tests"), it would still be good
to change the value of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT from 32 to 33 to make the code
more readable.
The 32-bit x86 JIT was using a limit of 32, just fix the wrong comments and
limit to 33 tail calls as the constant MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT updated. For the
mips64 JIT, use "ori" instead of "addiu" as suggested by Johan Almbladh.
For the riscv JIT, use RV_REG_TCC directly to save one register move as
suggested by Björn Töpel. For the other implementations, no function changes,
it does not change the current limit 33, the new value of MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT
can reflect the actual max tail call count, the related tail call testcases
in test_bpf module and selftests can work well for the interpreter and the
JIT.
Here are the test results on x86_64:
# uname -m
x86_64
# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls
# dmesg | tail -1
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/8 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls
# dmesg | tail -1
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [8/8 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# ./test_progs -t tailcalls
#142 tailcalls:OK
Summary: 1/11 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Tested-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Acked-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/1636075800-3264-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn
After commit 9298e63eaf ("bpf/tests: Add exhaustive tests of ALU
operand magnitudes"), when modprobe test_bpf.ko with JIT on mips64,
there exists segment fault due to the following reason:
[...]
ALU64_MOV_X: all register value magnitudes jited:1
Break instruction in kernel code[#1]
[...]
It seems that the related JIT implementations of some test cases
in test_bpf() have problems. At this moment, I do not care about
the segment fault while I just want to verify the test cases of
tail calls.
Based on the above background and motivation, add the following
module parameter test_suite to the test_bpf.ko:
test_suite=<string>: only the specified test suite will be run, the
string can be "test_bpf", "test_tail_calls" or "test_skb_segment".
If test_suite is not specified, but test_id, test_name or test_range
is specified, set 'test_bpf' as the default test suite. This is useful
to only test the corresponding test suite when specifying the valid
test_suite string.
Any invalid test suite will result in -EINVAL being returned and no
tests being run. If the test_suite is not specified or specified as
empty string, it does not change the current logic, all of the test
cases will be run.
Here are some test results:
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf
# dmesg | grep Summary
test_bpf: Summary: 1009 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/997 JIT'ed]
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/8 JIT'ed]
test_bpf: test_skb_segment: Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 FAILED
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_bpf
# dmesg | tail -1
test_bpf: Summary: 1009 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/997 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls
# dmesg
test_bpf: #0 Tail call leaf jited:0 21 PASS
[...]
test_bpf: #7 Tail call error path, index out of range jited:0 32 PASS
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 8 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/8 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_skb_segment
# dmesg
test_bpf: #0 gso_with_rx_frags PASS
test_bpf: #1 gso_linear_no_head_frag PASS
test_bpf: test_skb_segment: Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 FAILED
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_id=1
# dmesg
test_bpf: test_bpf: set 'test_bpf' as the default test_suite.
test_bpf: #1 TXA jited:0 54 51 50 PASS
test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/1 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_bpf test_name=TXA
# dmesg
test_bpf: #1 TXA jited:0 54 50 51 PASS
test_bpf: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/1 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_tail_calls test_range=6,7
# dmesg
test_bpf: #6 Tail call error path, NULL target jited:0 41 PASS
test_bpf: #7 Tail call error path, index out of range jited:0 32 PASS
test_bpf: test_tail_calls: Summary: 2 PASSED, 0 FAILED, [0/2 JIT'ed]
# rmmod test_bpf
# dmesg -c
# modprobe test_bpf test_suite=test_skb_segment test_id=1
# dmesg
test_bpf: #1 gso_linear_no_head_frag PASS
test_bpf: test_skb_segment: Summary: 1 PASSED, 0 FAILED
By the way, the above segment fault has been fixed in the latest bpf-next
tree which contains the mips64 JIT rework.
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Tested-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/1635384321-28128-1-git-send-email-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn
This patch expands the register-clobbering-during-function-call tests
to cover more all ALU32/64 MUL, DIV and MOD operations and all ATOMIC
operations. In short, if a JIT implements a complex operation with
a call to an external function, it must make sure to save and restore
all its caller-saved registers that may be clobbered by the call.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211001130348.3670534-6-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
This patch adds a set of tests for ALU64 and ALU32 arithmetic and bitwise
logical operations to verify correctness for all possible magnitudes of
the register and immediate operands. Mainly intended for JIT testing.
The patch introduces a pattern generator that can be used to drive
extensive tests of different kinds of operations. It is parameterized
to allow tuning of the operand combinations to test.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210914091842.4186267-5-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
The test suite used to call any fill_helper callbacks to generate eBPF
program data for all test cases at once. This caused ballooning memory
requirements as more extensive test cases were added. Now the each
fill_helper is called before the test is run and the allocated memory
released afterwards, before the next test case is processed.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210914091842.4186267-3-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
This patch allows a test cast to specify the number of runs to use. For
compatibility with existing test case definitions, the default value 0
is interpreted as MAX_TESTRUNS.
A reduced number of runs is useful for complex test programs where 1000
runs may take a very long time. Instead of reducing what is tested, one
can instead reduce the number of times the test is run.
Signed-off-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210914091842.4186267-2-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com
Turn BPF_PROG_RUN into a proper always inlined function. No functional and
performance changes are intended, but it makes it much easier to understand
what's going on with how BPF programs are actually get executed. It's more
obvious what types and callbacks are expected. Also extra () around input
parameters can be dropped, as well as `__` variable prefixes intended to avoid
naming collisions, which makes the code simpler to read and write.
This refactoring also highlighted one extra issue. BPF_PROG_RUN is both
a macro and an enum value (BPF_PROG_RUN == BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN). Turning
BPF_PROG_RUN into a function causes naming conflict compilation error. So
rename BPF_PROG_RUN into lower-case bpf_prog_run(), similar to
bpf_prog_run_xdp(), bpf_prog_run_pin_on_cpu(), etc. All existing callers of
BPF_PROG_RUN, the macro, are switched to bpf_prog_run() explicitly.
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210815070609.987780-2-andrii@kernel.org
