* RE: [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check
2022-06-20 19:13 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Kicinski
@ 2022-06-22 14:00 ` John Fastabend
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: John Fastabend @ 2022-06-22 14:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Kicinski, davem
Cc: netdev, edumazet, pabeni, Jakub Kicinski, john.fastabend, jakub,
yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving,
yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Commit 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()")
> has moved the inet_csk_has_ulp(sk) check from sk_psock_init() to
> the new tcp_bpf_update_proto() function. I'm guessing that this
> was done to allow creating psocks for non-inet sockets.
>
> Unfortunately the destruction path for psock includes the ULP
> unwind, so we need to fail the sk_psock_init() itself.
> Otherwise if ULP is already present we'll notice that later,
> and call tcp_update_ulp() with the sk_proto of the ULP
> itself, which will most likely result in the ULP looping
> its callbacks.
>
> Fixes: 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()")
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
> CC: john.fastabend@gmail.com
> CC: jakub@cloudflare.com
> CC: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org
> CC: dsahern@kernel.org
> CC: ast@kernel.org
> CC: daniel@iogearbox.net
> CC: andrii@kernel.org
> CC: kafai@fb.com
> CC: songliubraving@fb.com
> CC: yhs@fb.com
> CC: kpsingh@kernel.org
> CC: borisp@nvidia.com
> CC: cong.wang@bytedance.com
> CC: bpf@vger.kernel.org
> ---
> include/net/inet_sock.h | 5 +++++
> net/core/skmsg.c | 5 +++++
> net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c | 3 ---
> net/tls/tls_main.c | 2 ++
> 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
Thanks Jakub this looks correct to me. I can't remember at the moment
or dig up in the email or git why it was originally moved into the
update logic. Maybe Cong can comment seeing it was his original patch?
I seemed to have missed the error path on original review :(
From my side though,
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
2022-06-20 19:13 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Kicinski
2022-06-22 14:00 ` John Fastabend
@ 2022-06-22 17:24 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2022-06-23 5:42 ` John Fastabend
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Sitnicki
2022-06-23 9:12 ` [PATCH net v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-06-22 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
Cc: john.fastabend, jakub, yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii,
kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
Cover the scenario when we cannot insert a socket into the sockmap, because
it has it is using ULP. Failed insert should not have any effect on the ULP
state. This is a regression test.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
---
CC: john.fastabend@gmail.com
CC: jakub@cloudflare.com
CC: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org
CC: dsahern@kernel.org
CC: ast@kernel.org
CC: daniel@iogearbox.net
CC: andrii@kernel.org
CC: kafai@fb.com
CC: songliubraving@fb.com
CC: yhs@fb.com
CC: kpsingh@kernel.org
CC: borisp@nvidia.com
CC: cong.wang@bytedance.com
CC: bpf@vger.kernel.org
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
index af293ea1542c..86b0741d2464 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
* Tests for sockmap/sockhash holding kTLS sockets.
*/
+#include <netinet/tcp.h>
#include "test_progs.h"
#define MAX_TEST_NAME 80
@@ -92,9 +93,78 @@ static void test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(int family, int map)
close(srv);
}
+static void test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(int family, int map)
+{
+ struct sockaddr_storage addr = {};
+ socklen_t len = sizeof(addr);
+ struct sockaddr_in6 *v6;
+ struct sockaddr_in *v4;
+ int err, s, zero = 0;
+
+ s = socket(family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(s, 0, "socket"))
+ return;
+
+ switch (family) {
+ case AF_INET:
+ v4 = (struct sockaddr_in *)&addr;
+ v4->sin_family = AF_INET;
+ break;
+ case AF_INET6:
+ v6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)&addr;
+ v6->sin6_family = AF_INET6;
+ break;
+ default:
+ PRINT_FAIL("unsupported socket family %d", family);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ err = bind(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bind"))
+ goto close;
+
+ err = getsockname(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "getsockname"))
+ goto close;
+
+ err = connect(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "connect"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* save sk->sk_prot and set it to tls_prots */
+ err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_ULP, "tls", strlen("tls"));
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_ULP)"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* sockmap update should not affect saved sk_prot */
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map, &zero, &s, BPF_ANY);
+ if (!ASSERT_ERR(err, "sockmap update elem"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* call sk->sk_prot->setsockopt to dispatch to saved sk_prot */
+ err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &zero, sizeof(zero));
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY)");
+
+close:
+ close(s);
+}
+
+static const char *fmt_test_name(const char *subtest_name, int family,
+ enum bpf_map_type map_type)
+{
+ const char *map_type_str = BPF_MAP_TYPE_SOCKMAP ? "SOCKMAP" : "SOCKHASH";
+ const char *family_str = AF_INET ? "IPv4" : "IPv6";
+ static char test_name[MAX_TEST_NAME];
+
+ snprintf(test_name, MAX_TEST_NAME,
+ "sockmap_ktls %s %s %s",
+ subtest_name, family_str, map_type_str);
+
+ return test_name;
+}
+
static void run_tests(int family, enum bpf_map_type map_type)
{
- char test_name[MAX_TEST_NAME];
int map;
map = bpf_map_create(map_type, NULL, sizeof(int), sizeof(int), 1, NULL);
@@ -103,14 +173,10 @@ static void run_tests(int family, enum bpf_map_type map_type)
return;
}
- snprintf(test_name, MAX_TEST_NAME,
- "sockmap_ktls disconnect_after_delete %s %s",
- family == AF_INET ? "IPv4" : "IPv6",
- map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_SOCKMAP ? "SOCKMAP" : "SOCKHASH");
- if (!test__start_subtest(test_name))
- return;
-
- test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(family, map);
+ if (test__start_subtest(fmt_test_name("disconnect_after_delete", family, map_type)))
+ test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(family, map);
+ if (test__start_subtest(fmt_test_name("update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp", family, map_type)))
+ test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(family, map);
close(map);
}
--
2.35.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* RE: [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-06-23 5:42 ` John Fastabend
2022-06-23 9:12 ` Jakub Sitnicki
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: John Fastabend @ 2022-06-23 5:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Sitnicki, netdev
Cc: john.fastabend, jakub, yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii,
kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> Cover the scenario when we cannot insert a socket into the sockmap, because
> it has it is using ULP. Failed insert should not have any effect on the ULP
> state. This is a regression test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
> ---
Thanks, looks good. One small nit.
>
> +#include <netinet/tcp.h>
> #include "test_progs.h"
>
> #define MAX_TEST_NAME 80
> @@ -92,9 +93,78 @@ static void test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(int family, int map)
> close(srv);
> }
>
> +static void test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(int family, int map)
> +{
> + struct sockaddr_storage addr = {};
> + socklen_t len = sizeof(addr);
> + struct sockaddr_in6 *v6;
> + struct sockaddr_in *v4;
> + int err, s, zero = 0;
> +
> + s = socket(family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
> + if (!ASSERT_GE(s, 0, "socket"))
> + return;
> +
> + switch (family) {
> + case AF_INET:
> + v4 = (struct sockaddr_in *)&addr;
> + v4->sin_family = AF_INET;
> + break;
> + case AF_INET6:
> + v6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)&addr;
> + v6->sin6_family = AF_INET6;
>k+ break;
> + default:
> + PRINT_FAIL("unsupported socket family %d", family);
Probably want goto close here right?
> + return;
> + }
> +
> + err = bind(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bind"))
> + goto close;
> +
> + err = getsockname(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "getsockname"))
> + goto close;
> +
> + err = connect(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "connect"))
> + goto close;
> +
> + /* save sk->sk_prot and set it to tls_prots */
> + err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_ULP, "tls", strlen("tls"));
> + if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_ULP)"))
> + goto close;
> +
> + /* sockmap update should not affect saved sk_prot */
> + err = bpf_map_update_elem(map, &zero, &s, BPF_ANY);
> + if (!ASSERT_ERR(err, "sockmap update elem"))
> + goto close;
> +
> + /* call sk->sk_prot->setsockopt to dispatch to saved sk_prot */
> + err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &zero, sizeof(zero));
> + ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY)");
> +
> +close:
> + close(s);
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
2022-06-23 5:42 ` John Fastabend
@ 2022-06-23 9:12 ` Jakub Sitnicki
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-06-23 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: John Fastabend
Cc: netdev, yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai,
songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 10:42 PM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
> Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
>> Cover the scenario when we cannot insert a socket into the sockmap, because
>> it has it is using ULP. Failed insert should not have any effect on the ULP
>> state. This is a regression test.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
>> ---
>
> Thanks, looks good. One small nit.
>
>>
>> +#include <netinet/tcp.h>
>> #include "test_progs.h"
>>
>> #define MAX_TEST_NAME 80
>> @@ -92,9 +93,78 @@ static void test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(int family, int map)
>> close(srv);
>> }
>>
>> +static void test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(int family, int map)
>> +{
>> + struct sockaddr_storage addr = {};
>> + socklen_t len = sizeof(addr);
>> + struct sockaddr_in6 *v6;
>> + struct sockaddr_in *v4;
>> + int err, s, zero = 0;
>> +
>> + s = socket(family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
>> + if (!ASSERT_GE(s, 0, "socket"))
>> + return;
>> +
>> + switch (family) {
>> + case AF_INET:
>> + v4 = (struct sockaddr_in *)&addr;
>> + v4->sin_family = AF_INET;
>> + break;
>> + case AF_INET6:
>> + v6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)&addr;
>> + v6->sin6_family = AF_INET6;
>>k+ break;
>> + default:
>> + PRINT_FAIL("unsupported socket family %d", family);
>
> Probably want goto close here right?
Ah, thanks. Sent v2. I hope we can borrow a trick from systemd's book
and adapt __attribute__((cleanup(f))) in the future.
[...]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check
2022-06-20 19:13 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Kicinski
2022-06-22 14:00 ` John Fastabend
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-06-22 17:24 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2022-06-22 22:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-06-23 9:12 ` [PATCH net v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-06-22 17:24 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Kicinski
Cc: davem, netdev, edumazet, pabeni, john.fastabend, yoshfuji,
dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh,
borisp, cong.wang, bpf
On Mon, Jun 20, 2022 at 12:13 PM -07, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Commit 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()")
> has moved the inet_csk_has_ulp(sk) check from sk_psock_init() to
> the new tcp_bpf_update_proto() function. I'm guessing that this
> was done to allow creating psocks for non-inet sockets.
>
> Unfortunately the destruction path for psock includes the ULP
> unwind, so we need to fail the sk_psock_init() itself.
> Otherwise if ULP is already present we'll notice that later,
> and call tcp_update_ulp() with the sk_proto of the ULP
> itself, which will most likely result in the ULP looping
> its callbacks.
>
> Fixes: 8a59f9d1e3d4 ("sock: Introduce sk->sk_prot->psock_update_sk_prot()")
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
I followed up with a regression test, if you would like to pick it up
through net tree.
Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
Tested-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-06-22 22:26 ` Jakub Kicinski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Kicinski @ 2022-06-22 22:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Sitnicki
Cc: davem, netdev, edumazet, pabeni, john.fastabend, yoshfuji,
dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii, kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh,
borisp, cong.wang, bpf
On Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:24:16 +0200 Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
> I followed up with a regression test, if you would like to pick it up
> through net tree.
Sweet, thanks!
> Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
> Tested-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [PATCH net v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
2022-06-20 19:13 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Kicinski
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2022-06-22 17:24 ` [PATCH net 2/2] sock: redo the psock vs ULP protection check Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-06-23 9:12 ` Jakub Sitnicki
2022-06-24 18:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
3 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Jakub Sitnicki @ 2022-06-23 9:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: netdev
Cc: john.fastabend, jakub, yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii,
kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
Cover the scenario when we cannot insert a socket into the sockmap, because
it has it is using ULP. Failed insert should not have any effect on the ULP
state. This is a regression test.
Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
---
v2:
- Don't leak open socket if family is not supported (John)
CC: john.fastabend@gmail.com
CC: jakub@cloudflare.com
CC: yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org
CC: dsahern@kernel.org
CC: ast@kernel.org
CC: daniel@iogearbox.net
CC: andrii@kernel.org
CC: kafai@fb.com
CC: songliubraving@fb.com
CC: yhs@fb.com
CC: kpsingh@kernel.org
CC: borisp@nvidia.com
CC: cong.wang@bytedance.com
CC: bpf@vger.kernel.org
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c | 84 +++++++++++++++++--
1 file changed, 75 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
index af293ea1542c..e172d89e92e1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sockmap_ktls.c
@@ -4,6 +4,7 @@
* Tests for sockmap/sockhash holding kTLS sockets.
*/
+#include <netinet/tcp.h>
#include "test_progs.h"
#define MAX_TEST_NAME 80
@@ -92,9 +93,78 @@ static void test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(int family, int map)
close(srv);
}
+static void test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(int family, int map)
+{
+ struct sockaddr_storage addr = {};
+ socklen_t len = sizeof(addr);
+ struct sockaddr_in6 *v6;
+ struct sockaddr_in *v4;
+ int err, s, zero = 0;
+
+ switch (family) {
+ case AF_INET:
+ v4 = (struct sockaddr_in *)&addr;
+ v4->sin_family = AF_INET;
+ break;
+ case AF_INET6:
+ v6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)&addr;
+ v6->sin6_family = AF_INET6;
+ break;
+ default:
+ PRINT_FAIL("unsupported socket family %d", family);
+ return;
+ }
+
+ s = socket(family, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(s, 0, "socket"))
+ return;
+
+ err = bind(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "bind"))
+ goto close;
+
+ err = getsockname(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, &len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "getsockname"))
+ goto close;
+
+ err = connect(s, (struct sockaddr *)&addr, len);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "connect"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* save sk->sk_prot and set it to tls_prots */
+ err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_ULP, "tls", strlen("tls"));
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_ULP)"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* sockmap update should not affect saved sk_prot */
+ err = bpf_map_update_elem(map, &zero, &s, BPF_ANY);
+ if (!ASSERT_ERR(err, "sockmap update elem"))
+ goto close;
+
+ /* call sk->sk_prot->setsockopt to dispatch to saved sk_prot */
+ err = setsockopt(s, IPPROTO_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &zero, sizeof(zero));
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY)");
+
+close:
+ close(s);
+}
+
+static const char *fmt_test_name(const char *subtest_name, int family,
+ enum bpf_map_type map_type)
+{
+ const char *map_type_str = BPF_MAP_TYPE_SOCKMAP ? "SOCKMAP" : "SOCKHASH";
+ const char *family_str = AF_INET ? "IPv4" : "IPv6";
+ static char test_name[MAX_TEST_NAME];
+
+ snprintf(test_name, MAX_TEST_NAME,
+ "sockmap_ktls %s %s %s",
+ subtest_name, family_str, map_type_str);
+
+ return test_name;
+}
+
static void run_tests(int family, enum bpf_map_type map_type)
{
- char test_name[MAX_TEST_NAME];
int map;
map = bpf_map_create(map_type, NULL, sizeof(int), sizeof(int), 1, NULL);
@@ -103,14 +173,10 @@ static void run_tests(int family, enum bpf_map_type map_type)
return;
}
- snprintf(test_name, MAX_TEST_NAME,
- "sockmap_ktls disconnect_after_delete %s %s",
- family == AF_INET ? "IPv4" : "IPv6",
- map_type == BPF_MAP_TYPE_SOCKMAP ? "SOCKMAP" : "SOCKHASH");
- if (!test__start_subtest(test_name))
- return;
-
- test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(family, map);
+ if (test__start_subtest(fmt_test_name("disconnect_after_delete", family, map_type)))
+ test_sockmap_ktls_disconnect_after_delete(family, map);
+ if (test__start_subtest(fmt_test_name("update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp", family, map_type)))
+ test_sockmap_ktls_update_fails_when_sock_has_ulp(family, map);
close(map);
}
--
2.35.3
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH net v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
2022-06-23 9:12 ` [PATCH net v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP Jakub Sitnicki
@ 2022-06-24 18:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: patchwork-bot+netdevbpf @ 2022-06-24 18:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jakub Sitnicki
Cc: netdev, john.fastabend, yoshfuji, dsahern, ast, daniel, andrii,
kafai, songliubraving, yhs, kpsingh, borisp, cong.wang, bpf
Hello:
This patch was applied to netdev/net.git (master)
by Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>:
On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 11:12:31 +0200 you wrote:
> Cover the scenario when we cannot insert a socket into the sockmap, because
> it has it is using ULP. Failed insert should not have any effect on the ULP
> state. This is a regression test.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
> ---
> v2:
> - Don't leak open socket if family is not supported (John)
>
> [...]
Here is the summary with links:
- [net,v2] selftests/bpf: Test sockmap update when socket has ULP
https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net/c/935336c19104
You are awesome, thank you!
--
Deet-doot-dot, I am a bot.
https://korg.docs.kernel.org/patchwork/pwbot.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread