From: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
To: bpf@vger.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, tj@kernel.org,
martin.lau@kernel.org, ameryhung@gmail.com, kernel-team@meta.com
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v6 5/6] selftests/bpf: Test ambiguous associated struct_ops
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2025 14:17:40 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20251114221741.317631-6-ameryhung@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251114221741.317631-1-ameryhung@gmail.com>
Add a test to make sure implicit struct_ops association does not
break backward compatibility nor return incorrect struct_ops.
struct_ops programs should still be allowed to be reused in
different struct_ops map. The associated struct_ops map set implicitly
however will be poisoned. Trying to read it through the helper
bpf_prog_get_assoc_struct_ops() should result in a NULL pointer.
While recursion of test_1() cannot happen due to the associated
struct_ops being ambiguois, explicitly check for it to prevent stack
overflow if the test regresses.
Signed-off-by: Amery Hung <ameryhung@gmail.com>
---
.../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c | 38 ++++++++++
.../bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_reuse.c | 75 +++++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 113 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_reuse.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c
index 29e8b58a14fa..f69306cb8974 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_assoc.c
@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
#include <test_progs.h>
#include "struct_ops_assoc.skel.h"
+#include "struct_ops_assoc_reuse.skel.h"
static void test_st_ops_assoc(void)
{
@@ -65,8 +66,45 @@ static void test_st_ops_assoc(void)
struct_ops_assoc__destroy(skel);
}
+static void test_st_ops_assoc_reuse(void)
+{
+ struct struct_ops_assoc_reuse *skel = NULL;
+ int err;
+
+ skel = struct_ops_assoc_reuse__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "struct_ops_assoc_reuse__open"))
+ goto out;
+
+ err = bpf_program__assoc_struct_ops(skel->progs.syscall_prog_a,
+ skel->maps.st_ops_map_a, NULL);
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_program__assoc_struct_ops");
+
+ err = bpf_program__assoc_struct_ops(skel->progs.syscall_prog_b,
+ skel->maps.st_ops_map_b, NULL);
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_program__assoc_struct_ops");
+
+ err = struct_ops_assoc_reuse__attach(skel);
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "struct_ops_assoc__attach"))
+ goto out;
+
+ /* run syscall_prog that calls .test_1 and checks return */
+ err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.syscall_prog_a), NULL);
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
+
+ err = bpf_prog_test_run_opts(bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.syscall_prog_b), NULL);
+ ASSERT_OK(err, "bpf_prog_test_run_opts");
+
+ ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_err_a, 0, "skel->bss->test_err_a");
+ ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_err_b, 0, "skel->bss->test_err_b");
+
+out:
+ struct_ops_assoc_reuse__destroy(skel);
+}
+
void test_struct_ops_assoc(void)
{
if (test__start_subtest("st_ops_assoc"))
test_st_ops_assoc();
+ if (test__start_subtest("st_ops_assoc_reuse"))
+ test_st_ops_assoc_reuse();
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_reuse.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_reuse.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..caaa45bdccc2
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_assoc_reuse.c
@@ -0,0 +1,75 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+
+#include <vmlinux.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
+#include "bpf_misc.h"
+#include "../test_kmods/bpf_testmod.h"
+#include "../test_kmods/bpf_testmod_kfunc.h"
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
+
+#define MAP_A_MAGIC 1234
+int test_err_a;
+int recur;
+
+/*
+ * test_1_a is reused. The kfunc should not be able to get the associated
+ * struct_ops and call test_1 recursively as it is ambiguous.
+ */
+SEC("struct_ops")
+int BPF_PROG(test_1_a, struct st_ops_args *args)
+{
+ int ret;
+
+ if (!recur) {
+ recur++;
+ ret = bpf_kfunc_multi_st_ops_test_1_prog_arg(args, NULL);
+ if (ret != -1)
+ test_err_a++;
+ recur--;
+ }
+
+ return MAP_A_MAGIC;
+}
+
+/* Programs associated with st_ops_map_a */
+
+SEC("syscall")
+int syscall_prog_a(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct st_ops_args args = {};
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = bpf_kfunc_multi_st_ops_test_1_prog_arg(&args, NULL);
+ if (ret != MAP_A_MAGIC)
+ test_err_a++;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC(".struct_ops.link")
+struct bpf_testmod_multi_st_ops st_ops_map_a = {
+ .test_1 = (void *)test_1_a,
+};
+
+/* Programs associated with st_ops_map_b */
+
+int test_err_b;
+
+SEC("syscall")
+int syscall_prog_b(void *ctx)
+{
+ struct st_ops_args args = {};
+ int ret;
+
+ ret = bpf_kfunc_multi_st_ops_test_1_prog_arg(&args, NULL);
+ if (ret != MAP_A_MAGIC)
+ test_err_b++;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC(".struct_ops.link")
+struct bpf_testmod_multi_st_ops st_ops_map_b = {
+ .test_1 = (void *)test_1_a,
+};
--
2.47.3
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-11-14 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-11-14 22:17 [PATCH bpf-next v6 0/7] Support associating BPF programs with struct_ops Amery Hung
2025-11-14 22:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 1/6] bpf: Allow verifier to fixup kernel module kfuncs Amery Hung
2025-11-14 23:06 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-14 22:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 2/6] bpf: Support associating BPF program with struct_ops Amery Hung
2025-11-14 22:51 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-17 21:39 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2025-11-17 21:53 ` Amery Hung
2025-11-14 22:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 3/6] libbpf: Add support for " Amery Hung
2025-11-14 22:58 ` bot+bpf-ci
2025-11-14 22:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 4/6] selftests/bpf: Test BPF_PROG_ASSOC_STRUCT_OPS command Amery Hung
2025-11-14 22:17 ` Amery Hung [this message]
2025-11-14 22:17 ` [PATCH bpf-next v6 6/6] selftests/bpf: Test getting associated struct_ops in timer callback Amery Hung
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=20251114221741.317631-6-ameryhung@gmail.com \
--to=ameryhung@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tj@kernel.org \
/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).