From: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>,
ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com,
shuah@kernel.org, nathan@kernel.org, sdf@google.com,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 031/108] bpf: Fix a few selftest failures due to llvm18 change
Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 14:38:57 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240116194225.250921-31-sashal@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240116194225.250921-1-sashal@kernel.org>
From: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
[ Upstream commit b16904fd9f01b580db357ef2b1cc9e86d89576c2 ]
With latest upstream llvm18, the following test cases failed:
$ ./test_progs -j
#13/2 bpf_cookie/multi_kprobe_link_api:FAIL
#13/3 bpf_cookie/multi_kprobe_attach_api:FAIL
#13 bpf_cookie:FAIL
#77 fentry_fexit:FAIL
#78/1 fentry_test/fentry:FAIL
#78 fentry_test:FAIL
#82/1 fexit_test/fexit:FAIL
#82 fexit_test:FAIL
#112/1 kprobe_multi_test/skel_api:FAIL
#112/2 kprobe_multi_test/link_api_addrs:FAIL
[...]
#112 kprobe_multi_test:FAIL
#356/17 test_global_funcs/global_func17:FAIL
#356 test_global_funcs:FAIL
Further analysis shows llvm upstream patch [1] is responsible for the above
failures. For example, for function bpf_fentry_test7() in net/bpf/test_run.c,
without [1], the asm code is:
0000000000000400 <bpf_fentry_test7>:
400: f3 0f 1e fa endbr64
404: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 0x409 <bpf_fentry_test7+0x9>
409: 48 89 f8 movq %rdi, %rax
40c: c3 retq
40d: 0f 1f 00 nopl (%rax)
... and with [1], the asm code is:
0000000000005d20 <bpf_fentry_test7.specialized.1>:
5d20: e8 00 00 00 00 callq 0x5d25 <bpf_fentry_test7.specialized.1+0x5>
5d25: c3 retq
... and <bpf_fentry_test7.specialized.1> is called instead of <bpf_fentry_test7>
and this caused test failures for #13/#77 etc. except #356.
For test case #356/17, with [1] (progs/test_global_func17.c)), the main prog
looks like:
0000000000000000 <global_func17>:
0: b4 00 00 00 2a 00 00 00 w0 = 0x2a
1: 95 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 exit
... which passed verification while the test itself expects a verification
failure.
Let us add 'barrier_var' style asm code in both places to prevent function
specialization which caused selftests failure.
[1] https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/72903
Signed-off-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20231127050342.1945270-1-yonghong.song@linux.dev
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
net/bpf/test_run.c | 2 +-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_global_func17.c | 1 +
2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/net/bpf/test_run.c b/net/bpf/test_run.c
index c9fdcc5cdce1..711cf5d59816 100644
--- a/net/bpf/test_run.c
+++ b/net/bpf/test_run.c
@@ -542,7 +542,7 @@ struct bpf_fentry_test_t {
int noinline bpf_fentry_test7(struct bpf_fentry_test_t *arg)
{
- asm volatile ("");
+ asm volatile ("": "+r"(arg));
return (long)arg;
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_global_func17.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_global_func17.c
index a32e11c7d933..5de44b09e8ec 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_global_func17.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_global_func17.c
@@ -5,6 +5,7 @@
__noinline int foo(int *p)
{
+ barrier_var(p);
return p ? (*p = 42) : 0;
}
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-16 19:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20240116194225.250921-1-sashal@kernel.org>
2024-01-16 19:38 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 003/108] selftests/bpf: fix RELEASE=1 build for tc_opts Sasha Levin
2024-01-16 19:38 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 004/108] selftests/bpf: satisfy compiler by having explicit return in btf test Sasha Levin
2024-01-16 19:38 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 006/108] selftests/bpf: Fix pyperf180 compilation failure with clang18 Sasha Levin
2024-01-16 19:38 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 008/108] selftests/bpf: Fix issues in setup_classid_environment() Sasha Levin
2024-01-16 19:38 ` Sasha Levin [this message]
2024-01-16 19:39 ` [PATCH AUTOSEL 6.7 066/108] selftests/bpf: fix compiler warnings in RELEASE=1 mode Sasha Levin
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=20240116194225.250921-31-sashal@kernel.org \
--to=sashal@kernel.org \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=llvm@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=nathan@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).