From: Luis Gerhorst <luis.gerhorst@fau.de>
To: Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Some unpriv verifier tests failed due to bpf_jit_bypass_spec_v1
Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2025 21:59:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <878qhr69jb.fsf@fau.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEyhmHTvj4cDRfu1FXSEXmdCqyWfs3ehw5gtB9qJCrThuUy2Kw@mail.gmail.com> (Hengqi Chen's message of "Tue, 23 Sep 2025 17:52:11 +0800")
Hengqi Chen <hengqi.chen@gmail.com> writes:
> Some unpriv verifier tests (e.g. bounds_map_value_variant_2) failed
> on LoongArch which implements bpf_jit_bypass_spec_v1().
>
> This is because some verifier paths do can_skip_alu_sanitation().
> So for such cases, the priv/unpriv test cases will have the same
> verifier error messages and the tests failed with unexpected error
> messages.
>
> How can we fix them?
Please excuse the late reply.
The most simple fix would be to add the missing '#ifdef SPEC_V1' to
these tests, however, I anyway intend to send a new version of [1] which
removes some of these errors altogether. The patch did not get merged
with the rest of the series earlier because there was a merge conflict
with another fix (now resolved).
I ran the CI with bypass_spec_v1 set for x86 to reproduce your issue [2]
and the patch fixes some of the tests as expected [3]. Can you confirm
this is the same for LoongArch?
Some test still fail because the '#ifdef SPEC_V1' is still missing for
them. I will prepare a patch to resolve this.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/CAADnVQLC_zViaCs5Huu63Jr2oCx1NGY3f_VCkJhrKvqst7HL=g@mail.gmail.com/
[2] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/pull/9929
[3] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/pull/9927
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-03 20:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-09-23 9:52 Some unpriv verifier tests failed due to bpf_jit_bypass_spec_v1 Hengqi Chen
2025-10-03 19:59 ` Luis Gerhorst [this message]
2025-10-05 10:24 ` Luis Gerhorst
2025-10-05 10:35 ` [RFC 1/3] bpf: Fall back to nospec for sanitization-failures Luis Gerhorst
2025-10-10 12:03 ` kernel test robot
2025-10-05 10:41 ` [RFC 2/3] selftests/bpf: Fix SPEC_V1/V4 for other archs Luis Gerhorst
2025-10-05 10:45 ` [RFC 3/3] selftests/bpf: Add missing SPEC_V1-ifdefs Luis Gerhorst
2026-01-09 0:05 ` Alexei Starovoitov
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=878qhr69jb.fsf@fau.de \
--to=luis.gerhorst@fau.de \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=hengqi.chen@gmail.com \
--cc=yangtiezhu@loongson.cn \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/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.