public inbox for bpf@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Puranjay Mohan <puranjay@kernel.org>
To: Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org,
	eddyz87@gmail.com, paul.chaignon@gmail.com, shuah@kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/bpf: add a 32-bit bounds deduction case
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2026 12:36:30 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <m2fr5xnwkx.fsf@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260318113200.303824-1-sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com>

Sun Jian <sun.jian.kdev@gmail.com> writes:

> verifier_bounds.c already has 64-bit cross-sign-boundary bounds
> deduction coverage.
>
> Recent 32-bit signed/unsigned intersection tests extended the refinement
> coverage, but a corresponding negative case is still missing.
>
> Add a 32-bit selftest for that case and assert that the program is
> rejected, confirming that verifier remains conservative there.

The "recent 32-bit signed/unsigned intersection tests" are Eduard's
signed_unsigned_intersection32_case1/case2 (commit f81fdfd16771), which
cover the two refinement branches added to deduce_bounds_32_from_32() in
commit fbc7aef517d8.

Your test claims to be a "negative case" for the two-overlap scenario
where the verifier can't refine bounds. But tracing through the code,
that's not what happens. After the two w0 conditionals you have
u32=[0x80, 0xffffff80] and s32=[-128, 127]. In
deduce_bounds_32_from_32():

- (u32)s32_min_value <= (u32)s32_max_value (0xffffff80 <= 0x7f) is false,
so we enter the else branch

- u32_max < (u32)s32_min (0xffffff80 < 0xffffff80) is false, skip

- (u32)s32_max < u32_min (0x7f < 0x80) is true - the single-overlap else
if fires, successfully narrowing the register to the constant 0xffffff80

So this isn't a "two overlaps / no refinement" case at all. The verifier
resolves the value completely. This is the same else if branch that
signed_unsigned_intersection32_case1 already exercises (with u32=[3,
U32_MAX], s32=[S32_MIN, 1], where (u32)1 < 3 fires the same path).

No new coverage is added.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-03-18 12:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-03-18 11:32 [PATCH] selftests/bpf: add a 32-bit bounds deduction case Sun Jian
2026-03-18 12:36 ` Puranjay Mohan [this message]
2026-03-19  7:10   ` sun jian

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=m2fr5xnwkx.fsf@kernel.org \
    --to=puranjay@kernel.org \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paul.chaignon@gmail.com \
    --cc=shuah@kernel.org \
    --cc=sun.jian.kdev@gmail.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