From: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
To: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>,
ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org
Cc: kafai@fb.com, songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com,
john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, dxu@dxuuu.xyz,
bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
shuah@kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2] selftests/bpf: Fix build of task_pt_regs test for arm64
Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2021 12:26:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bdfabd343bdec7e27ff92bc0145d813011227f8f.camel@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210906163635.302307-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org>
On Mon, 2021-09-06 at 17:36 +0100, Jean-Philippe Brucker wrote:
> struct pt_regs is not exported to userspace on all archs. arm64 and
> s390
> export "user_pt_regs" instead, which causes build failure at the
> moment:
>
> progs/test_task_pt_regs.c:8:16: error: variable has incomplete type
> 'struct pt_regs'
> struct pt_regs current_regs = {};
>
> Instead of using pt_regs from ptrace.h, use the larger kernel struct
> from vmlinux.h directly. Since the test runner task_pt_regs.c does not
> have access to the kernel struct definition, copy it into a char array.
>
> Fixes: 576d47bb1a92 ("bpf: selftests: Add bpf_task_pt_regs() selftest")
> Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jean-Philippe Brucker <jean-philippe@linaro.org>
> ---
> v2: Work on struct pt_regs from vmlinux.h
> v1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210902090925.2010528-1-jean-philippe@linaro.org/
> ---
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_pt_regs.c | 1 -
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_task_pt_regs.c | 19 +++++++++++++------
> 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_pt_regs.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_pt_regs.c
> index 53f0e0fa1a53..37c20b5ffa70 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_pt_regs.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/task_pt_regs.c
> @@ -1,7 +1,6 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> #define _GNU_SOURCE
> #include <test_progs.h>
> -#include <linux/ptrace.h>
> #include "test_task_pt_regs.skel.h"
>
> void test_task_pt_regs(void)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_task_pt_regs.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_task_pt_regs.c
> index 6c059f1cfa1b..e6cb09259408 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_task_pt_regs.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_task_pt_regs.c
> @@ -1,12 +1,17 @@
> // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
>
> -#include <linux/ptrace.h>
> -#include <linux/bpf.h>
> +#include "vmlinux.h"
> #include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> #include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
>
> -struct pt_regs current_regs = {};
> -struct pt_regs ctx_regs = {};
> +#define PT_REGS_SIZE sizeof(struct pt_regs)
> +
> +/*
> + * The kernel struct pt_regs isn't exported in its entirety to
> userspace.
> + * Pass it as an array to task_pt_regs.c
> + */
> +char current_regs[PT_REGS_SIZE] = {};
> +char ctx_regs[PT_REGS_SIZE] = {};
> int uprobe_res = 0;
>
> SEC("uprobe/trigger_func")
> @@ -17,8 +22,10 @@ int handle_uprobe(struct pt_regs *ctx)
>
> current = bpf_get_current_task_btf();
> regs = (struct pt_regs *) bpf_task_pt_regs(current);
> - __builtin_memcpy(¤t_regs, regs, sizeof(*regs));
> - __builtin_memcpy(&ctx_regs, ctx, sizeof(*ctx));
> + if (bpf_probe_read_kernel(current_regs, PT_REGS_SIZE, regs))
> + return 0;
> + if (bpf_probe_read_kernel(ctx_regs, PT_REGS_SIZE, ctx))
> + return 0;
>
> /* Prove that uprobe was run */
> uprobe_res = 1;
I've tested this patch on s390 and it does indeed fix the build issue.
Thanks!
Tested-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
Acked-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-07 10:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-06 16:36 [PATCH bpf-next v2] selftests/bpf: Fix build of task_pt_regs test for arm64 Jean-Philippe Brucker
2021-09-07 10:26 ` Ilya Leoshkevich [this message]
2021-09-07 15:30 ` 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=bdfabd343bdec7e27ff92bc0145d813011227f8f.camel@linux.ibm.com \
--to=iii@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
--cc=jean-philippe@linaro.org \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kafai@fb.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=songliubraving@fb.com \
--cc=yhs@fb.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