From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
Vasily Gorbik <gor@linux.ibm.com>,
Alexander Gordeev <agordeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>,
Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v3 02/12] selftests/bpf: Fix test_verifier on 32-bit systems
Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2023 23:37:04 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230222223714.80671-3-iii@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230222223714.80671-1-iii@linux.ibm.com>
bpf_fentry_test_t.a, bpf_iter_meta.seq, bpf_map.ops and
prog_test_ref_kfunc.next are pointers, so access them using BPF_W on
32-bit systems.
Signed-off-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 5 +++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c | 2 +-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c | 2 +-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c | 4 ++--
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c | 2 +-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c | 2 +-
6 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 8b9949bb833d..81a8aef7362c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -62,6 +62,11 @@
#define MAX_FUNC_INFOS 8
#define MAX_BTF_STRINGS 256
#define MAX_BTF_TYPES 256
+#if BITS_PER_LONG == 32
+#define BPF_PTR BPF_W
+#else
+#define BPF_PTR BPF_DW
+#endif
#define INSN_OFF_MASK ((__s16)0xFFFF)
#define INSN_IMM_MASK ((__s32)0xFFFFFFFF)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c
index a91de8cd9def..6ed98eb217b3 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_fetch_add.c
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@
* because it's kernel memory.
*/
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 1),
- BPF_ATOMIC_OP(BPF_DW, BPF_ADD | BPF_FETCH, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, 0),
+ BPF_ATOMIC_OP(BPF_PTR, BPF_ADD | BPF_FETCH, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, 0),
/* Done */
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c
index 3e024c891178..e48b409d1759 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_get_stack.c
@@ -46,7 +46,7 @@
"bpf_get_task_stack return R0 range is refined",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_6, 0), // ctx->meta->seq
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_PTR, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_6, 0), // ctx->meta->seq
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_1, 8), // ctx->task
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0), // fixup_map_array_48b
BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
index 9d993926bf0e..a59759db8c78 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/calls.c
@@ -168,7 +168,7 @@
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1, 16),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_PTR, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_1, 16),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -4),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
@@ -230,7 +230,7 @@
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL, 0, 0),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 16),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_PTR, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, 16),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, BPF_PSEUDO_KFUNC_CALL, 0, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
index 6914904344c0..b8ea6b0b536d 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
@@ -235,7 +235,7 @@
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0, 0),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JNE, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 16),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_PTR, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 16),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_this_cpu_ptr),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c
index 17ee84dc7766..b8e308d678b7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_ptr.c
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_6, 0),
BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_PTR, BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
--
2.39.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-22 22:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-02-22 22:37 [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/12] bpf: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 01/12] selftests/bpf: Finish folding after BPF_FUNC_csum_diff Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` Ilya Leoshkevich [this message]
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 03/12] sparc: Update maximum errno Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 04/12] bpf: sparc64: Emit fixed-length instructions for BPF_PSEUDO_FUNC Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 05/12] bpf: sparc64: Fix jumping to the first insn Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 06/12] bpf: sparc64: Use 32-bit tail call index Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 07/12] bpf, arm: Use bpf_jit_get_func_addr() Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 08/12] bpf: sparc64: " Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-23 9:31 ` Jiri Olsa
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 09/12] bpf: x86: " Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 10/12] bpf, x86_32: " Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 11/12] bpf: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 23:43 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2023-02-23 8:39 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-22 22:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 12/12] selftests/bpf: Trim DENYLIST.s390x Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-23 17:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v3 00/12] bpf: Support 64-bit pointers to kfuncs Alexei Starovoitov
2023-02-23 20:42 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-02-25 0:02 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2023-02-27 12:36 ` Ilya Leoshkevich
2023-03-28 12:45 ` Jiri Olsa
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230222223714.80671-3-iii@linux.ibm.com \
--to=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=agordeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=gor@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=hca@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.