From: bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org
To: a.s.protopopov@gmail.com,bpf@vger.kernel.org,linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org,netdev@vger.kernel.org,ast@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,andrii@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,memxor@gmail.com,kpsingh@kernel.org,matt@bobrowski.net,john.fastabend@gmail.com,brauner@kernel.org,paul@paul-moore.com,torvalds@linux-foundation.org,edumazet@google.com,kuba@kernel.org,pabeni@redhat.com
Cc: a.s.protopopov@gmail.com,ast@kernel.org,andrii@kernel.org,daniel@iogearbox.net,martin.lau@kernel.org,eddyz87@gmail.com,yonghong.song@linux.dev,mason@kernel.org,ihor.solodrai@linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: Add tests for the generic netlink BPF hook
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 12:07:11 +0000 (UTC) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8872f8c265628c401291f2921919eb96e1169eef2a4e5d0b1d8dfb5e80bced6a@mail.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260831110934.241898-7-a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5286 bytes --]
> Add a few tests for the new generic netlink BPF hook.
> Policies only apply themselves to the "nlctrl" family.
> The following tests are being added:
> * doit: allow or deny CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY
> * dump: allow or deny CTRL_CMD_GETPOLICY, nlmsg_flags |= NLM_F_DUMP
> * nlmsg_flags: allow or deny a command based on nlmsg_flags
> * other_family: check that other families still pass
The enumeration lists four subtests but the patch registers five. The
"netns" subtest is missing from this list:
if (test__start_subtest("doit")) test_doit(skel, fd);
if (test__start_subtest("dump")) test_dump(skel, fd);
if (test__start_subtest("nlmsg_flags")) test_nlmsg_flags(skel, fd);
if (test__start_subtest("other_family")) test_other_family(skel, fd, other_id);
if (test__start_subtest("netns")) test_netns(skel, fd);
The netns subtest is the only one exercising the net argument of
bpf_lsm_genl_family_rcv_msg(), and it introduces target_netns_inum plus
a filter in the BPF program, netns_new()/open_netns(), a second socket,
and the netns_inum() helper - roughly 45 of the 242 added lines. Since
the netns filtering path is the least obvious part of the hook contract,
would it make sense to add a fifth bullet, for example "* netns: deny a
command only inside a target netns, allow it elsewhere"?
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> index 08c6e8a4e..6ca0b083a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/config
> @@ -30,6 +30,7 @@ CONFIG_DYNAMIC_FTRACE=y
> CONFIG_FPROBE=y
> CONFIG_FUNCTION_TRACER=y
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/genl_lsm.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/genl_lsm.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..9f866c4c6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/genl_lsm.c
[ ... ]
> +static void test_nlmsg_flags(struct genl_lsm *skel, int fd)
> +{
> + int err;
> +
> + /* ensure denying works */
> + skel->bss->target_cmd = CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY;
> + skel->bss->target_flags = NLM_F_REQUEST | NLM_F_DUMP;
> + skel->bss->allow = false;
> +
> + err = nlctrl_request(fd, CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY, false);
> + ASSERT_OK(err, "doit_flags_not_matched");
> +
> + err = nlctrl_request(fd, CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY, true);
> + ASSERT_EQ(err, -TEST_ERRNO, "deny_dump_flags");
> +
> + /* now, the other way around */
> + skel->bss->target_flags = NLM_F_REQUEST;
> +
> + err = nlctrl_request(fd, CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY, true);
> + ASSERT_OK(err, "doit_flags_not_matched");
> +
> + err = nlctrl_request(fd, CTRL_CMD_GETFAMILY, false);
> + ASSERT_EQ(err, -TEST_ERRNO, "deny_dump_flags");
> +}
The second half reuses the assertion tags from the first half, but they
name the opposite case. The dump request gets "doit_flags_not_matched"
and the doit request gets "deny_dump_flags". The test logic is correct
but when test_progs prints only the tag and __func__, a CI failure
reporting "genl_lsm:FAIL:deny_dump_flags" cannot be attributed to either
of the two assertions with that name, and whichever one it is, the tag
names the wrong netlink operation. Would four distinct tags - for example
"deny_dump_flags_matched", "allow_doit_flags_unmatched",
"allow_dump_flags_unmatched", "deny_doit_flags_matched" - remove the
ambiguity?
[ ... ]
> +void test_genl_lsm(void)
> +{
> + struct genl_lsm *skel = NULL;
> + int fd = -1;
> + int err, other_id;
> +
> + skel = genl_lsm__open_and_load();
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "genl_lsm__open_and_load"))
> + return;
> +
> + fd = genl_open(0);
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_FD(fd, "genl_open"))
> + goto cleanup;
> +
> + /* do this before attaching our hook, just in case */
> + other_id = genl_resolve_family(fd, OTHER_FAMILY_NAME);
> + if (other_id == -ENOENT) {
> + test__skip();
> + goto cleanup;
> + }
A subsystem pattern flags this as potentially concerning: when
CONFIG_ETHTOOL_NETLINK is absent, genl_resolve_family() returns -ENOENT
and the test skips with no printed reason. A reader of the TAP output
sees "#N genl_lsm:SKIP" with nothing indicating the missing prerequisite
was the ethtool genl family, so a silently-skipped test looks identical
to a deliberately-disabled one. All five subtests are skipped this way,
including the four (doit, dump, nlmsg_flags, netns) that do not need
ethtool - only test_other_family() consumes other_id.
This pattern is common in bpf selftests (e.g. aggregate_ret.c:52,
arena_spin_lock.c:57 and :66 all do exactly this), and the config hunk
in this same patch adds CONFIG_ETHTOOL_NETLINK so the skip path should
not be taken in a properly configured CI run. Would a one-line printf
plus optionally deferring the ethtool resolution into test_other_family()
so the other four subtests still run be worth addressing?
[ ... ]
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/genl_lsm.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/genl_lsm.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000..c4d8b4d23
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/genl_lsm.c
[ ... ]
---
AI reviewed your patch. Please fix the bug or email reply why it's not a bug.
See: https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/blob/master/ci/claude/README.md
CI run summary: https://github.com/kernel-patches/bpf/actions/runs/33386073074
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-31 12:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-31 11:09 [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] Add new way to add BPF LSM hooks Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/7] bpf: Allow BPF LSM programs to attach to more hooks Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:50 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-31 12:48 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 22:42 ` Paul Moore
2026-09-01 13:36 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-09-01 22:15 ` Paul Moore
2026-09-02 15:31 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-09-02 19:43 ` Paul Moore
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/7] net, bpf: Add a generic netlink hook on msg_rcv Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 12:07 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-31 13:22 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/7] net, bpf: Add bpf hooks for ethtool control path Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/7] selftests/bpf: Extract some helpers from tests to the netlink library Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 5/7] selftests/bpf: Add netdevsim helper library Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 12:07 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-31 12:55 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: Add tests for the generic netlink BPF hook Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 12:07 ` bot+bpf-ci [this message]
2026-08-31 13:01 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 11:09 ` [PATCH bpf-next 7/7] selftests/bpf: Add tests for BPF ethtool hooks Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 12:07 ` bot+bpf-ci
2026-08-31 13:12 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-08-31 22:34 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/7] Add new way to add BPF LSM hooks Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-01 12:29 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-09-02 0:49 ` Jakub Kicinski
2026-09-02 15:11 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-09-02 18:07 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-09-02 19:31 ` Anton Protopopov
2026-09-03 12:16 ` Justin Suess
2026-09-03 13:23 ` Anton Protopopov
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=8872f8c265628c401291f2921919eb96e1169eef2a4e5d0b1d8dfb5e80bced6a@mail.kernel.org \
--to=bot+bpf-ci@kernel.org \
--cc=a.s.protopopov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=brauner@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=ihor.solodrai@linux.dev \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@kernel.org \
--cc=mason@kernel.org \
--cc=matt@bobrowski.net \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--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