BPF List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: sashiko-bot@kernel.org
To: "Maciej Fijalkowski" <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net-next 02/15] selftests: xsk: size the TX UMEM in HW_SW_MAX_RING_SIZE
Date: Sat, 17 Oct 2026 17:44:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <sashiko-outbox-175716@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20261016174338.787135-3-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>

Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 2 potential issue(s) to consider:
- [Medium] bpf: integer underflow calculating xsk batch_size
- [Low] bpf: multi-line comment does not follow kernel style
--

commit 743c541687fdf2d7592285088f7c482d5114a852
Author: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>

selftests: xsk: size the TX UMEM in HW_SW_MAX_RING_SIZE

This commit sizes the TX UMEM like the RX one to avoid failures in
dual-interface mode and caps the batch size below the XSK ring size to avoid
infinite loops.

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
> index 2a13628740924..05457f77ca52c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_xsk.c
[ ... ]
> @@ -2521,10 +2525,12 @@ int testapp_hw_sw_max_ring_size(struct test_spec *test)
>  		return ret;
>  
>  	/* Set batch_size to 8152 for testing, as the ice HW ignores the 3 lowest bits when
> -	 * updating the Rx HW tail register.
> +	 * updating the Rx HW tail register. __send_pkts() waits until a whole batch fits
> +	 * in the XSK TX ring, so keep it below that ring's size on NICs with larger rings.
>  	 */

[Severity: Low]
This isn't a bug, but does this multi-line comment follow the BPF subsystem
style guidelines?

The guidelines request the opening /* to be on its own line.

> -	test->ifobj_tx->xsk->batch_size = test->ifobj_tx->ring.tx_max_pending - 8;
> -	test->ifobj_rx->xsk->batch_size = test->ifobj_tx->ring.tx_max_pending - 8;
> +	batch_size = min(test->ifobj_tx->ring.tx_max_pending, max_descs) - 8;

[Severity: Medium]
Can this subtraction underflow if tx_max_pending is less than 8?

If an interface supports ethtool get_ringparam but reports a tx_max_pending
smaller than 8 (such as netdevsim altered via debugfs or drivers that leave
it 0), the unsigned subtraction would underflow and produce a massive
batch_size.

Could this cause __send_pkts() to infinite loop or hang the test while trying
to reserve descriptors that exceed the ring capacity?

> +	test->ifobj_tx->xsk->batch_size = batch_size;
> +	test->ifobj_rx->xsk->batch_size = batch_size;
>  	if (pkt_stream_replace(test, max_descs, MIN_PKT_SIZE)) {
>  		clean_sockets(test, test->ifobj_tx);

-- 
Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20261016174338.787135-1-maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com?part=2

  reply	other threads:[~2026-10-17 17:44 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-10-16 17:43 [PATCH v4 net-next 00/15] selftests: net: migrate AF_XDP test suite over to net Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 01/15] selftests: xsk: factor endpoint work out of pthread wrappers Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 02/15] selftests: xsk: size the TX UMEM in HW_SW_MAX_RING_SIZE Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-17 17:44   ` sashiko-bot [this message]
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 03/15] selftests: xsk: drop the single-interface loopback mode Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-17 17:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 04/15] selftests/bpf: drop the test_progs AF_XDP wrapper Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 05/15] selftests: net: add a generic rule for BPF skeletons Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 06/15] selftests: xsk: move the AF_XDP test suite to selftests/net Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 07/15] selftests: xsk: collect interface capabilities in struct xsk_caps Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 08/15] selftests: xsk: split xskxceiver main() into setup, run and cleanup Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 09/15] selftests: xsk: run one test case per xskxceiver invocation Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-17 17:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 10/15] selftests: xsk: run the RX and TX endpoints in separate processes Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 11/15] selftests: xsk: send UDP over IPv4 or IPv6 between the interface MACs Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-17 17:44   ` sashiko-bot
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 12/15] selftests: xsk: prepare xskxceiver for endpoints on two hosts Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 13/15] selftests: xsk: list the hardware test cases Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 14/15] selftests: drv-net: test AF_XDP zero-copy with an SKB peer Maciej Fijalkowski
2026-10-16 17:43 ` [PATCH v4 net-next 15/15] selftests: xsk: document generic and hardware endpoint runs Maciej Fijalkowski

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=sashiko-outbox-175716@kernel.org \
    --to=sashiko-bot@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
    --cc=sashiko-reviews@lists.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