All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: daniel@iogearbox.net (Daniel Borkmann)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix div-by-zero case
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 20:39:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <563A5EEA.6020007@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <563A5171.5070608@linaro.org>

On 11/04/2015 07:41 PM, Shi, Yang wrote:
...
>>> Agreed, and we may need add one more test cases in test_bpf module to cover
>>> MOD?
>>
>> Let me know if you have a test case ready :)
>
> Does the below change look like a valid test?
>
> +               "MOD default X",
> +               .u.insns = {
> +                       /*
> +                        * A = 0x42
> +                        * A = A mod X ; this halt the filter execution if X is 0
> +                        * ret 0x42
> +                        */
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM, 0x42),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_X, 0),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_K, 0x42),
> +               },
> +               CLASSIC | FLAG_NO_DATA,
> +               {},
> +               { {0x1, 0x0 } },
> +       },
> +       {
> +               "MOD default A",
> +               .u.insns = {
> +                       /*
> +                        * A = A mod 1
> +                        * ret A
> +                        */
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_K, 0x1),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_A, 0x0),
> +               },
> +               CLASSIC | FLAG_NO_DATA,
> +               {},
> +               { {0x1, 0x0 } },
> +       },
>
> My test result with it:
> test_bpf: #284 MOD default X jited:1 ret 66 != 0 FAIL (1 times)
> test_bpf: #285 MOD default A jited:1 102 PASS
>
> If it looks right, I will post a patch to add the test cases.

Looks good to me.

Thanks,
Daniel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
To: "Shi, Yang" <yang.shi@linaro.org>, Z Lim <zlim.lnx@gmail.com>
Cc: Xi Wang <xi.wang@gmail.com>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	stable@vger.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@plumgrid.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix div-by-zero case
Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2015 20:39:22 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <563A5EEA.6020007@iogearbox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <563A5171.5070608@linaro.org>

On 11/04/2015 07:41 PM, Shi, Yang wrote:
...
>>> Agreed, and we may need add one more test cases in test_bpf module to cover
>>> MOD?
>>
>> Let me know if you have a test case ready :)
>
> Does the below change look like a valid test?
>
> +               "MOD default X",
> +               .u.insns = {
> +                       /*
> +                        * A = 0x42
> +                        * A = A mod X ; this halt the filter execution if X is 0
> +                        * ret 0x42
> +                        */
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM, 0x42),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_X, 0),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_K, 0x42),
> +               },
> +               CLASSIC | FLAG_NO_DATA,
> +               {},
> +               { {0x1, 0x0 } },
> +       },
> +       {
> +               "MOD default A",
> +               .u.insns = {
> +                       /*
> +                        * A = A mod 1
> +                        * ret A
> +                        */
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD | BPF_K, 0x1),
> +                       BPF_STMT(BPF_RET | BPF_A, 0x0),
> +               },
> +               CLASSIC | FLAG_NO_DATA,
> +               {},
> +               { {0x1, 0x0 } },
> +       },
>
> My test result with it:
> test_bpf: #284 MOD default X jited:1 ret 66 != 0 FAIL (1 times)
> test_bpf: #285 MOD default A jited:1 102 PASS
>
> If it looks right, I will post a patch to add the test cases.

Looks good to me.

Thanks,
Daniel

  reply	other threads:[~2015-11-04 19:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-11-04  6:56 [PATCH] arm64: bpf: fix div-by-zero case Zi Shen Lim
2015-11-04  6:56 ` Zi Shen Lim
2015-11-04  7:04 ` Xi Wang
2015-11-04  7:04   ` Xi Wang
2015-11-04 18:21   ` Shi, Yang
2015-11-04 18:21     ` Shi, Yang
2015-11-04 18:25     ` Z Lim
2015-11-04 18:25       ` Z Lim
2015-11-04 18:41       ` Shi, Yang
2015-11-04 18:41         ` Shi, Yang
2015-11-04 19:39         ` Daniel Borkmann [this message]
2015-11-04 19:39           ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-11-04 18:03 ` Shi, Yang
2015-11-04 18:03   ` Shi, Yang

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=563A5EEA.6020007@iogearbox.net \
    --to=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    /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.