public inbox for ltp@lists.linux.it
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Clemens Famulla-Conrad <cfamullaconrad@suse.de>
To: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/4] Basic eBPF tests
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2019 09:26:23 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1566977183.6539.10.camel@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1492475067.8173800.1566829761941.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com>

On Mon, 2019-08-26 at 10:29 -0400, Jan Stancek wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> > I've ended up playing with the patchset and fixed a few loose ends
> > on
> > the map test and as I had the code at hand I decided to send v4
> > instead
> > of pointing out the mistakes in a review.
> > 
> > There were numerous small changes for the map test:
> > 
> > * Make sure the key buffer is sized exactly for the content
> > 
> > * Initialized the array/hash element value in test setup
> > 
> > * Made the code flow a bit more obvious, it was hard to tell which
> >   part was run for n == 0 and which for n == 1
> > 
> > Also it looks that for me the test that loads the eBPF program ends
> > up
> > with EPERM randomly at about 10th iteration both as unpriviledged
> > and
> > priviledged user, which is really strange.
> 
> There's one EPERM I can reproduce reliably with bpf_map test, which
> appears
> to originate from "bpf_charge_memlock".
> 
> There's a deferred component to map freeing, and unchange appears to
> be part of it:
>   bpf_map_release
>     bpf_map_put
>       INIT_WORK(&map->work, bpf_map_free_deferred);
>         (deferred) bpf_uncharge_memlock
> 
> When I lower max locked memory, it's easy to hit:
> # ulimit  -l 128; ./bpf_map01 -i 100
> ...
> bpf_map01.c:52: CONF: bpf() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN on this system:
> EPERM
> 
> Can you try bumping max locked memory to some high value and check
> if that helps your case?

# for i in 64 128 256 1024; do
    echo $i; 
    ulimit -l $i;
    ./bpf_prog01 -i 100 |& grep -P 'passed|CONF'; 
done

64
CONF: bpf() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN on this system: EPERM
passed   16

128
CONF: bpf() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN on this system: EPERM
passed   16

256
CONF: bpf() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN on this system: EPERM
passed   32

1024
CONF: bpf() requires CAP_SYS_ADMIN on this system: EPERM
passed   192


Which produce almost the same results.
Same approach with `bpf_map01` differs a lot. Sometimes all pass,
sometimes none.


/Clemens


  reply	other threads:[~2019-08-28  7:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-08-26 11:10 [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/4] Basic eBPF tests Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 11:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 1/4] BPF: Essential headers for map creation Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 11:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 2/4] BPF: Sanity check creating and updating maps Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 12:52   ` Jan Stancek
2019-09-02 14:05     ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 11:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 3/4] BPF: Essential headers for a basic program Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 11:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 4/4] BPF: Sanity check creating a program Cyril Hrubis
2019-08-26 16:05   ` Jan Stancek
2019-08-28  7:41   ` Clemens Famulla-Conrad
2019-08-26 14:29 ` [LTP] [PATCH v4 0/4] Basic eBPF tests Jan Stancek
2019-08-28  7:26   ` Clemens Famulla-Conrad [this message]
2019-08-28  7:46     ` Jan Stancek
2019-08-28 10:15       ` Clemens Famulla-Conrad
2019-09-02 14:55   ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-09-03  5:50     ` Jan Stancek
2019-09-03  8:58       ` Cyril Hrubis
2019-09-03  9:51         ` Jan Stancek

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=1566977183.6539.10.camel@suse.de \
    --to=cfamullaconrad@suse.de \
    --cc=ltp@lists.linux.it \
    /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