From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: tunnel: add sanity test for checksums
Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 15:21:08 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7372590a-f40b-17d1-f780-3bd1ce4f30bb@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221220004701.402165-2-kuba@kernel.org>
On 12/19/22 4:47 PM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Simple netdevsim based test. Netdevsim will validate xmit'ed
> packets, in particular we care about checksum sanity (along
> the lines of checks inside skb_checksum_help()). Triggering
> skb_checksum_help() directly would require the right HW device
> or a crypto device setup, netdevsim is much simpler.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
> ---
> drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c | 5 ++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tc_tunnel.sh | 27 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 32 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> index 6db6a75ff9b9..e4808a6d37a4 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,11 @@ static netdev_tx_t nsim_start_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> if (!nsim_ipsec_tx(ns, skb))
> goto out;
>
> + /* Validate the packet */
> + if (skb->ip_summed == CHECKSUM_PARTIAL)
> + WARN_ON_ONCE((unsigned int)skb_checksum_start_offset(skb) >=
> + skb_headlen(skb));
> +
> u64_stats_update_begin(&ns->syncp);
> ns->tx_packets++;
> ns->tx_bytes += skb->len;
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tc_tunnel.sh b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tc_tunnel.sh
> index 334bdfeab940..4dac87f6a6fa 100755
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tc_tunnel.sh
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tc_tunnel.sh
> @@ -15,6 +15,7 @@ readonly ns1_v4=192.168.1.1
> readonly ns2_v4=192.168.1.2
> readonly ns1_v6=fd::1
> readonly ns2_v6=fd::2
> +readonly nsim_v4=192.168.2.1
>
> # Must match port used by bpf program
> readonly udpport=5555
> @@ -67,6 +68,10 @@ cleanup() {
> if [[ -n $server_pid ]]; then
> kill $server_pid 2> /dev/null
> fi
> +
> + if [ -e /sys/bus/netdevsim/devices/netdevsim1 ]; then
> + echo 1 > /sys/bus/netdevsim/del_device
> + fi
> }
>
> server_listen() {
> @@ -93,6 +98,25 @@ verify_data() {
> fi
> }
>
> +decap_sanity() {
> + echo "test decap sanity"
> + modprobe netdevsim
> + echo 1 1 > /sys/bus/netdevsim/new_device
> + udevadm settle
> + nsim=$(ls /sys/bus/netdevsim/devices/netdevsim1/net/)
> + ip link set dev $nsim up
> + ip addr add dev $nsim $nsim_v4/24
> +
> + tc qdisc add dev $nsim clsact
> + tc filter add dev $nsim egress \
> + bpf direct-action object-file ${BPF_FILE} section decap
> +
> + echo abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz | \
> + nc -u 192.168.2.2 7777
Thanks for the fix and the idea on how to test it.
I have posted a patch to translate this test to a test for test_progs that can
finish and exit such that it can be run continuously in CI. The test attaches a
tc-bpf at lo and the bpf prog directly checks for the skb->ip_summed ==
CHECKSUM_NONE and the broken csum_start condition.
If the test_progs patch looks good, patch 1 can be landed first and then land
the test_progs patch. wdyt?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-20 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-20 0:47 [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: pull before calling skb_postpull_rcsum() Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-20 0:47 ` [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: tunnel: add sanity test for checksums Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-20 23:13 ` [PATCH bpf] selftests/bpf: Test bpf_skb_adjust_room on CHECKSUM_PARTIAL Martin KaFai Lau
2022-12-20 23:21 ` Martin KaFai Lau [this message]
2022-12-20 23:36 ` [PATCH bpf 2/2] selftests/bpf: tunnel: add sanity test for checksums Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-20 1:21 ` [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: pull before calling skb_postpull_rcsum() Stanislav Fomichev
2022-12-20 1:45 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-12-20 1:55 ` Stanislav Fomichev
2022-12-21 0:20 ` 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=7372590a-f40b-17d1-f780-3bd1ce4f30bb@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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