From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org
Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev,
kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] follow up for __jited test tag
Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2024 01:06:41 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240823080644.263943-1-eddyz87@gmail.com> (raw)
This patch-set is a collection of follow-ups for
"__jited test tag to check disassembly after jit" series (see [1]).
First patch is most important:
as it turns out, I broke all test_loader based tests for s390 CI.
E.g. see log [2] for s390 execution of test_progs,
note all 'verivier_*' tests being skipped.
This happens because of incorrect handling of corner case when
get_current_arch() does not know which architecture to return.
Second patch makes matching of function return sequence in
verifier_tailcall_jit more flexible:
-__jited(" retq")
+__jited(" {{(retq|jmp 0x)}}")
The difference could be seen with and w/o mitigations=off boot
parameter for test VM (CI runs with mitigations=off, hence it
generates retq).
Third patch addresses Alexei's request to add #define and a comment in
jit_disasm_helpers.c.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240820102357.3372779-1-eddyz87@gmail.com/
[2] https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/10518445973/job/29144511595
Eduard Zingerman (3):
selftests/bpf: test_loader.c:get_current_arch() should not return 0
selftests/bpf: match both retq/rethunk in verifier_tailcall_jit
selftests/bpf: #define LOCAL_LABEL_LEN for jit_disasm_helpers.c
.../testing/selftests/bpf/jit_disasm_helpers.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
.../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_tailcall_jit.c | 4 ++--
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_loader.c | 9 +++++----
3 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
--
2.46.0
next reply other threads:[~2024-08-23 8:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-23 8:06 Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2024-08-23 8:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] selftests/bpf: test_loader.c:get_current_arch() should not return 0 Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-23 8:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests/bpf: match both retq/rethunk in verifier_tailcall_jit Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-23 8:06 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: #define LOCAL_LABEL_LEN for jit_disasm_helpers.c Eduard Zingerman
2024-08-23 14:40 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] follow up for __jited test tag patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=20240823080644.263943-1-eddyz87@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@fb.com \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox