From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
To: Werner Kasselman <werner@verivus.ai>
Cc: "bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>,
Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
"open list:KERNEL SELFTEST FRAMEWORK"
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v5 2/2] selftests/bpf: cover same-reg sock_ops rtt_min request_sock access
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2026 14:11:39 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <202642221444.tUNv.martin.lau@linux.dev> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260420230030.2802408-3-werner@verivus.com>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2026 at 11:00:37PM +0000, Werner Kasselman wrote:
> Add a tcpbpf sock_ops selftest that forces a same-register ctx->rtt_min read on request_sock-backed callbacks and verifies the observed value is zero.
>
> This covers the dst_reg == src_reg path that the previous ctx_rewrite-only test did not exercise.
Same formatting issue.
>
> Signed-off-by: Werner Kasselman <werner@verivus.com>
> ---
> .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c | 4 ++++
> .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_tcpbpf.h | 2 ++
> 3 files changed, 20 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c
> index 7e8fe1bad03f..1b08e49327d0 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tcpbpf_user.c
> @@ -42,6 +42,10 @@ static void verify_result(struct tcpbpf_globals *result)
> /* check getsockopt for window_clamp */
> ASSERT_EQ(result->window_clamp_client, 9216, "window_clamp_client");
> ASSERT_EQ(result->window_clamp_server, 9216, "window_clamp_server");
> +
> + /* check same-reg rtt_min read on request_sock-backed callbacks */
> + ASSERT_NEQ(result->rtt_min_req_seen, 0, "rtt_min_req_seen");
> + ASSERT_EQ(result->rtt_min_req_nonzero, 0, "rtt_min_req_nonzero");
> }
>
> static void run_test(struct tcpbpf_globals *result)
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c
> index 6935f32eeb8f..a488b282b5dd 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_tcpbpf_kern.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@ int bpf_testcb(struct bpf_sock_ops *skops)
> {
> char header[sizeof(struct ipv6hdr) + sizeof(struct tcphdr)];
> struct bpf_sock_ops *reuse = skops;
> + long rtt_min = (long)skops;
It is overly smart to test the same dst_reg == src_reg.
A new test has just been added to test it in a cleaner way.
pw-bot: cr
You haven't spent time to take a look of the patches first.
Please don't post again. I will stop reviewing your patches from now.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-22 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-04-17 2:31 [PATCH bpf v3 0/2] bpf: fix sock_ops rtt_min OOB read Werner Kasselman
2026-04-17 2:31 ` [PATCH 1/2] bpf: extract SOCK_OPS_LOAD_TCP_SOCK_FIELD from SOCK_OPS_GET_FIELD Werner Kasselman
2026-04-17 2:31 ` [PATCH 2/2] bpf: guard sock_ops rtt_min against non-locked tcp_sock Werner Kasselman
2026-04-20 20:43 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-04-20 22:16 ` [PATCH bpf v4 0/2] " Werner Kasselman
2026-04-20 22:16 ` [PATCH bpf v4 1/2] " Werner Kasselman
2026-04-20 22:16 ` [PATCH bpf v4 2/2] selftests/bpf: cover same-reg sock_ops rtt_min request_sock access Werner Kasselman
2026-04-20 23:00 ` [PATCH bpf v5 0/2] bpf: guard sock_ops rtt_min against non-locked tcp_sock Werner Kasselman
2026-04-20 23:00 ` [PATCH bpf v5 1/2] " Werner Kasselman
2026-04-22 21:03 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2026-04-20 23:00 ` [PATCH bpf v5 2/2] selftests/bpf: cover same-reg sock_ops rtt_min request_sock access Werner Kasselman
2026-04-22 21:11 ` Martin KaFai Lau [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=202642221444.tUNv.martin.lau@linux.dev \
--to=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=werner@verivus.ai \
--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