From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@huawei.com>
To: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@amazon.com>
Cc: <stable@vger.kernel.org>, Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>,
Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
Pu Lehui <pulehui@huaweicloud.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5.15 0/6] Backporting for 5.15 test_verifier failed
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 23:30:05 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3288ffdc-51bb-6725-835d-a44db396f989@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230804152459.2565673-1-pulehui@huaweicloud.com>
Hi Luiz,
My local 5.15 environment is a little bit weird, could you help me to
test it?
On 2023/8/4 23:24, Pu Lehui wrote:
> Luiz Capitulino reported the test_verifier test failed:
> "precise: ST insn causing spi > allocated_stack".
> And it was introduced by the following upstream commit:
> ecdf985d7615 ("bpf: track immediate values written to stack by BPF_ST instruction")
>
> Eduard's investigation [4] shows that test failure is not a bug, but a
> difference in BPF verifier behavior between upstream, where commits
> [1,2,3] by Andrii are present, and 5.15, where these commits are absent.
>
> Backporting strategy is consistent with Eduard in kernel version 6.1 [5],
> but with some conflicts in patch #1, #4 and #6 due to the bpf of 5.15
> doesn't support more features.
>
> Commits of Andrii:
> [1] be2ef8161572 ("bpf: allow precision tracking for programs with subprogs")
> [2] f63181b6ae79 ("bpf: stop setting precise in current state")
> [3] 7a830b53c17b ("bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing")
>
> Links:
> [4] https://lore.kernel.org/stable/c9b10a8a551edafdfec855fbd35757c6238ad258.camel@gmail.com/
> [5] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230724124223.1176479-2-eddyz87@gmail.com/
>
> Andrii Nakryiko (4):
> bpf: allow precision tracking for programs with subprogs
> bpf: stop setting precise in current state
> bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing
> selftests/bpf: make test_align selftest more robust
>
> Ilya Leoshkevich (1):
> selftests/bpf: Fix sk_assign on s390x
>
> Yonghong Song (1):
> selftests/bpf: Workaround verification failure for
> fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code
>
> kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 199 ++++++++++++++++--
> .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/align.c | 36 ++--
> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/sk_assign.c | 25 ++-
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/connect4_prog.c | 2 +-
> .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_assign.c | 11 +
> .../bpf/progs/test_sk_assign_libbpf.c | 3 +
> 6 files changed, 243 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_assign_libbpf.c
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-08-04 15:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-08-04 15:24 [PATCH 5.15 0/6] Backporting for 5.15 test_verifier failed Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 1/6] bpf: allow precision tracking for programs with subprogs Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 2/6] bpf: stop setting precise in current state Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 3/6] bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 4/6] selftests/bpf: make test_align selftest more robust Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 5/6] selftests/bpf: Workaround verification failure for fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:24 ` [PATCH 5.15 6/6] selftests/bpf: Fix sk_assign on s390x Pu Lehui
2023-08-04 15:30 ` Pu Lehui [this message]
2023-08-04 16:43 ` [PATCH 5.15 0/6] Backporting for 5.15 test_verifier failed Luiz Capitulino
2023-08-09 14:59 ` Luiz Capitulino
2023-08-10 0:59 ` Pu Lehui
2023-08-12 9:27 ` Greg KH
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=3288ffdc-51bb-6725-835d-a44db396f989@huawei.com \
--to=pulehui@huawei.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=luizcap@amazon.com \
--cc=pulehui@huaweicloud.com \
--cc=stable@vger.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