From: Richard Palethorpe <rpalethorpe@suse.de>
To: Joerg Vehlow <lkml@jv-coder.de>
Cc: ltp@lists.linux.it
Subject: Re: [LTP] [PATCH v2 4/4] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 15:11:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sftmz8ef.fsf@suse.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d68d8f72-fdc9-3a2e-991d-682d8274070f@jv-coder.de>
Hello Joerg,
> I did some more digging and bisecting. First I bisected the mainline
> kernel and found, that the commit 2c78ee898 ("bpf: Implement CAP_BPF")
> makes the check run successful. This is only in linux >= 5.8.
> But my 5.4 ubuntu kernel also successfully ran the check, so I also
> bisected ubuntu sources [1] and found this commit to be the fix here:
> 2fa9ab45c ("bpf: No need to simulate speculative domain for immediates")
> This commit is also in the mainline kernel, but only in >= 5.13.
Uffff, interesting, some of the things mentioned in this commit seem
familiar. I did start working on other BPF reproducers, but gave up for
the time being.
>
> I guess the check you implemented now disables the test for a lot of
> kernels, that do not have a patch like this... I will stop here and just
> accept, that the test is not running successfully in my case. But still
> wanted to share this information.
Thanks, yes this could be useful.
>
> Joerg
>
>
> [1]
> https://git.launchpad.net/~ubuntu-kernel/ubuntu/+source/linux/+git/focal/commit/?id=2fa9ab45c53e8b104ba8f7d3a953131cc818fcc0
--
Thank you,
Richard.
--
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp
prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-17 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-08-27 5:13 [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] bpf: Print full verification log Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-27 5:13 ` [LTP] [PATCH 2/3] bpf: Mention CAP_BPF in required privs and add fallback definition Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-27 5:13 ` [LTP] [PATCH 3/3] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-30 15:23 ` [LTP] [PATCH 1/3] bpf: Print full verification log Cyril Hrubis
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 1/4] API: Add tst_printf to avoid specifying the output FD in tests Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 2/4] bpf: Print full verification log Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:51 ` Cyril Hrubis
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 3/4] bpf: Mention CAP_BPF in required privs and add fallback definition Richard Palethorpe
2021-08-31 9:10 ` [LTP] [PATCH v2 4/4] bpf_prog05: Drop CAP_BPF and check if ptr arithmetic is allowed Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-11 10:42 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-11 14:36 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-12 6:55 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-13 7:48 ` Richard Palethorpe
2022-01-14 6:51 ` Joerg Vehlow
2022-01-17 15:11 ` Richard Palethorpe [this message]
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=87sftmz8ef.fsf@suse.de \
--to=rpalethorpe@suse.de \
--cc=lkml@jv-coder.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