Re: [PATCH bpf 0/8] Fixes to bpf_msg_push/pop_data and test_sockmap

[Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@bytedance.com>]

On 10/24/24 7:43 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> Hi Zijian,
> 
> On 10/24/24 6:06 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
>> zijianzhang@ wrote:
>>> From: Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@bytedance.com>
>>>
>>> Several fixes to test_sockmap and added push/pop logic for 
>>> msg_verify_data
>>> Before the fixes, some of the tests in test_sockmap are problematic,
>>> resulting in pseudo-correct result.
>>>
>>> 1. txmsg_pass is not set in some tests, as a result, no eBPF program is
>>> attached to the sockmap.
>>> 2. In SENDPAGE, a wrong iov_length in test_send_large may result in some
>>> test skippings and failures.
>>> 3. The calculation of total_bytes in msg_loop_rx is wrong, which may 
>>> cause
>>> msg_loop_rx end early and skip some data tests.
>>>
>>> Besides, for msg_verify_data, I added push/pop checking logic to 
>>> function
>>> msg_verify_data and added more tests for different cases.
>>
>> Thanks! Yep I think push/pop are not widely used anywhere unfortunately.
>> There are some interesting uses for push/pop to add/edit headers, but
>> I've not gotten there yet clearly.
>>

Thanks for the reviewing :)

>>> After that, I found that there are some bugs in bpf_msg_push_data,
>>> bpf_msg_pop_data and sk_msg_reset_curr, and fix them. I guess the reason
>>> why they have not been exposed is that because of the above problems, 
>>> they
>>> will not be triggered.
>>
>> Good. I'll review these quickly tonight/tomorrow and run some testing.
>> We don't currently have any longer running tests with push/pop.
> 
> Looks like the series needs a rebase to latest bpf tree.
> 
> Thanks,
> Daniel

This series depends on my previous fixes to test_sockmap("Two fixes for
test_sockmap"), and they were merged to bpf/bpf-next.git (net branch) a
week ago. Shall I wait for merging of them to the latest bpf, and then
rebase?

Thanks,
Zijian