From: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
To: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>, Song Liu <songliubraving@fb.com>,
Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: add reason of rejection in ld_imm64
Date: Fri, 20 May 2022 19:37:28 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220520113728.12708-5-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220520113728.12708-1-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
It may not be immediately clear why that ld_imm64 test cases are
rejected, especially for test1 and test2 where JMP to the 2nd
instruction of BPF_LD_IMM64 is performed.
Add brief explaination of why each test case in verifier/ld_imm64.c
should be rejected.
Signed-off-by: Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com>
---
.../testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c | 20 ++++++++++---------
1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
index f9297900cea6..021312641aaf 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ld_imm64.c
@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
+/* Note: BPF_LD_IMM64 is composed of two instructions of class BPF_LD */
{
- "test1 ld_imm64",
+ "test1 ld_imm64: reject JMP to 2nd instruction of BPF_LD_IMM64",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
@@ -14,7 +15,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test2 ld_imm64",
+ "test2 ld_imm64: reject JMP to 2nd instruction of BPF_LD_IMM64",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0),
@@ -28,7 +29,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test3 ld_imm64",
+ "test3 ld_imm64: reject incomplete BPF_LD_IMM64 instruction",
.insns = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
@@ -42,7 +43,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test4 ld_imm64",
+ "test4 ld_imm64: reject incomplete BPF_LD_IMM64 instruction",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
@@ -70,7 +71,7 @@
.retval = 1,
},
{
- "test8 ld_imm64",
+ "test8 ld_imm64: reject 1st off!=0",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 1, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 1),
@@ -80,7 +81,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test9 ld_imm64",
+ "test9 ld_imm64: reject 2nd off!=0",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 1, 1),
@@ -90,7 +91,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test10 ld_imm64",
+ "test10 ld_imm64: reject 2nd dst_reg!=0",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 0, 1),
@@ -100,7 +101,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test11 ld_imm64",
+ "test11 ld_imm64: reject 2nd src_reg!=0",
.insns = {
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, 0, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
@@ -113,6 +114,7 @@
"test12 ld_imm64",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ /* BPF_REG_1 is interpreted as BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD */
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
BPF_RAW_INSN(0, 0, 0, 0, 0),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
@@ -121,7 +123,7 @@
.result = REJECT,
},
{
- "test13 ld_imm64",
+ "test13 ld_imm64: 2nd src_reg!=0",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_1, 0),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_LD | BPF_IMM | BPF_DW, 0, BPF_REG_1, 0, 1),
--
2.36.1
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-20 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-05-20 11:37 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] bpf: verifier: remove redundant opcode checks Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-20 11:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf: verifier: update resolve_pseudo_ldimm64() comment Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-20 11:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] bpf: verifier: explain opcode check in check_ld_imm() Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-20 23:50 ` Yonghong Song
2022-05-21 0:25 ` Yonghong Song
2022-05-24 7:10 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-24 15:12 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-05-26 8:59 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-20 11:37 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] bpf: verifier: remove redundant opcode checks Shung-Hsi Yu
2022-05-20 22:46 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2022-05-20 11:37 ` Shung-Hsi Yu [this message]
2022-05-21 0:27 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] selftests/bpf: add reason of rejection in ld_imm64 Yonghong Song
2022-05-24 4:49 ` Shung-Hsi Yu
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=20220520113728.12708-5-shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--to=shung-hsi.yu@suse.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox