From: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
To: Joerg Vehlow <lkml@jv-coder.de>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 4/4] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 15:11:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sftmz8ef.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d68d8f72-fdc9-3a2e-991d-682d8274070f@jv-coder.de>
Hello Joerg,
> I did some more digging and bisecting. First I bisected the mainline
> kernel and found, that the commit 2c78ee898 ("bpf: Implement CAP_BPF")
> makes the check run successful. This is only in linux >= 5.8.
> But my 5.4 ubuntu kernel also successfully ran the check, so I also
> bisected ubuntu sources [1] and found this commit to be the fix here:
> 2fa9ab45c ("bpf: No need to simulate speculative domain for immediates")
> This commit is also in the mainline kernel, but only in >= 5.13.
Uffff, interesting, some of the things mentioned in this commit seem
familiar. I did start working on other BPF reproducers, but gave up for
the time being.
>
> I guess the check you implemented now disables the test for a lot of
> kernels, that do not have a patch like this... I will stop here and just
> accept, that the test is not running successfully in my case. But still
> wanted to share this information.
Thanks, yes this could be useful.
>
> Joerg
>
>
> [1]
> https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux/+git/focal/commit/?id=2fa9ab45c53e8b104ba8f7d3a953131cc818fcc0
--
Thank you,
Richard.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-17 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-27 5:13 [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] bpf: Print full verification log Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-27 5:13 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/3] bpf: Mention CAP_BPF in required privs and add fallback definition Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-27 5:13 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/3] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-30 15:23 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] bpf: Print full verification log Cyril Hrubis
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/4] API: Add tst_printf to avoid specifying the output FD in tests Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/4] bpf: Print full verification log Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:51 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 3/4] bpf: Mention CAP_BPF in required privs and add fallback definition Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 4/4] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-11 10:42 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-11 14:36 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-12 6:55 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-13 7:48 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-14 6:51 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-17 15:11 ` Richard Palethorpe [this message]
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=87sftmz8ef.fsf@suse.de \
--to=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=lkml@jv-coder.de \
--cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
/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.