From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from out-188.mta1.migadu.com (out-188.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.188]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 45FD83B8BC5; Fri, 17 Apr 2026 10:45:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776422755; cv=none; b=OVXPhURVlxnbmrCD5C75AJUO5gFAo9w3zmVn4P2WsLYDqvt+/al6Mj8EIP1PX98O1PveP/wpCH6FRIDQu3EnyN7WJtABPQAppszfWZN3MI6NPRD8InfRysD6T6UKQhAgJKbZTNSp2D96tC3mTmlBFaxpVGwuoHnAePy8CXT5FEs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1776422755; c=relaxed/simple; bh=0VRL0cpLJ+qES0oZbNjlAL/FiePH+bQn1HvWNYQ7Fz8=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=jN6fYiuwreeapzE9qF7n7Kzse6WSkx82KMp6Q7iVshvOp37gi0KnEgYoxn1iU6SR+HnIkjOzsQ+cnC9KlknNt+/NkXOdfwzlD9U+eKYFYICrEEP1GuOLWYq1Y/SmBHaw/fc1Svrj1Nf7nSDYjBNHgjMeHafNcdDTa77CtusL+mo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=l/DWVYQV; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.188 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="l/DWVYQV" Message-ID: <9d8f345e-e3aa-428d-8484-8127387bb4a4@linux.dev> DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1776422741; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=TX419zoOiGLPA/HkUNw0XGLgQfe+SD1cqA8DukbVfYA=; b=l/DWVYQV/EMiKjrRUIH1rDNxFlRC62ccAcD9M3jpilGTVBLiGKOkFHMGahAuxby3XNgdwh fmf8HkF9S5ONFOjHvmqq2c3OEa33cnmZ1D4SIQeUvv/19zfqN/RftnlUZ1cX/Ygakeo6c8 NlbPQI/G+Lm1OJE124oh4JAqX+5DPsA= Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2026 18:45:07 +0800 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v3 2/2] selftests/bpf: Test TCP_NODELAY in TCP hdr opt callbacks To: KaFai Wan , martin.lau@linux.dev, daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, eddyz87@gmail.com, memxor@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, jolsa@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, horms@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, jiayuan.chen@linux.dev, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org References: <20260417092035.2299913-1-kafai.wan@linux.dev> <20260417092035.2299913-3-kafai.wan@linux.dev> X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. From: Jiayuan Chen In-Reply-To: <20260417092035.2299913-3-kafai.wan@linux.dev> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT On 4/17/26 5:20 PM, KaFai Wan wrote: > Add a sockops selftest for the TCP_NODELAY restriction in > BPF_SOCK_OPS_HDR_OPT_LEN_CB and BPF_SOCK_OPS_WRITE_HDR_OPT_CB. > > With BPF_SOCK_OPS_WRITE_HDR_OPT_CB_FLAG enabled, > bpf_setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY) returns -EOPNOTSUPP from > BPF_SOCK_OPS_HDR_OPT_LEN_CB and BPF_SOCK_OPS_WRITE_HDR_OPT_CB, avoiding > unbounded recursion and kernel stack overflow. > > Other cases continue to work as before, including > BPF_SOCK_OPS_PASSIVE_ESTABLISHED_CB and user space > setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY). > > Signed-off-by: KaFai Wan Reviewed-by: Jiayuan Chen A little nit below, no need to resend. > --- > .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_hdr_options.c | 12 +++++++++++- > .../bpf/progs/test_misc_tcp_hdr_options.c | 15 ++++++++++++++- > 2 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_hdr_options.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_hdr_options.c > index 56685fc03c7e..7b9dbbb84316 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_hdr_options.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcp_hdr_options.c > @@ -461,7 +461,7 @@ static void misc(void) > const unsigned int nr_data = 2; > struct bpf_link *link; > struct sk_fds sk_fds; > - int i, ret; > + int i, ret, true_val = 1; > NIT: please follow the reverse xmas tree variable ordering > lport_linum_map_fd = bpf_map__fd(misc_skel->maps.lport_linum_map); > > @@ -477,6 +477,10 @@ static void misc(void) > return; > } > > + ret = setsockopt(sk_fds.active_fd, SOL_TCP, TCP_NODELAY, &true_val, sizeof(true_val)); > + if (!ASSERT_OK(ret, "setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY)")) > + goto check_linum; > + > for (i = 0; i < nr_data; i++) { > /* MSG_EOR to ensure skb will not be combined */ > ret = send(sk_fds.active_fd, send_msg, sizeof(send_msg), > @@ -507,6 +511,12 @@ static void misc(void) > > ASSERT_EQ(misc_skel->bss->nr_hwtstamp, 0, "nr_hwtstamp"); > > + ASSERT_TRUE(misc_skel->data->nodelay_est_ok, "unexpected nodelay_est_ok"); > + > + ASSERT_TRUE(misc_skel->data->nodelay_hdr_len_err, "unexpected nodelay_hdr_len_err"); > + > + ASSERT_TRUE(misc_skel->data->nodelay_write_hdr_err, "unexpected nodelay_write_hdr_err"); > + NIT: It's would be misleading if you run ./test_progs with "-v" misc:PASS:unexpected nodelay_est_ok 0 nsec "PASS:unexpected" ? > check_linum: > ASSERT_FALSE(check_error_linum(&sk_fds), "check_error_linum"); > sk_fds_close(&sk_fds); > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_misc_tcp_hdr_options.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_misc_tcp_hdr_options.c > index d487153a839d..a02e28d9db2e 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_misc_tcp_hdr_options.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_misc_tcp_hdr_options.c > @@ -29,6 +29,10 @@ unsigned int nr_syn = 0; > unsigned int nr_fin = 0; > unsigned int nr_hwtstamp = 0; > > +bool nodelay_est_ok = true; > +bool nodelay_hdr_len_err = true; > +bool nodelay_write_hdr_err = true; I prefer "nodelay_hdr_len_reject"