From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@amazon.com>,
Greg KH <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
"sashal@kernel.org" <sashal@kernel.org>
Cc: "stable@vger.kernel.org" <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
ast@kernel.org, gilad.reti@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [5.10, 5.15] New bpf kselftest failure
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 22:14:30 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <82a3eaee09acd603a4d816952eeee1268b459906.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9c7fc5ab-1c06-8452-2747-aa89e7a1dfb6@amazon.com>
On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 10:59 -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
>
> On 2023-07-17 10:55, Eduard Zingerman wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 2023-07-17 at 09:04 -0400, Luiz Capitulino wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The upstream commit below is backported to 5.10.186, 5.15.120 and 6.1.36:
> > >
> > > """
> > > commit ecdf985d7615356b78241fdb159c091830ed0380
> > > Author: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Wed Feb 15 01:20:27 2023 +0200
> > >
> > > bpf: track immediate values written to stack by BPF_ST instruction
> > > """
> > >
> > > This commit is causing the following bpf:test_verifier kselftest to fail:
> > >
> > > """
> > > # #760/p precise: ST insn causing spi > allocated_stack FAIL
> > > """
> > >
> >
> > I can reproduce the error on 6.1.36 but don't understand what's causing it yet.
> > The log is suspiciously different from master, will comment later today.
>
> Thank you very much for the prompt reply, Eduard.
>
> I'm available for further testing if needed.
A few observations:
- this is not a bug, precision tracking works a bit differently;
- the patches [1] and [2] (or just [1] but with a minor conflict)
are sufficient to make behavior similar to master.
I will provided a more detailed explanation in 1-2hr, sorry.
[1] f63181b6ae79 ("bpf: stop setting precise in current state")
[2] 7a830b53c17b ("bpf: aggressively forget precise markings during state checkpointing")
>
> - Luiz
>
> >
> > > Since this test didn't fail before ecdf985d76 backport, the question is
> > > if this is a test bug or if this commit introduced a regression.
> > >
> > > I haven't checked if this failure is present in latest Linus tree because
> > > I was unable to build & run the bpf kselftests in an older distro.
> > >
> > > Also, there some important details about running the bpf kselftests
> > > in 5.10 and 5.15:
> > >
> > > * On 5.10, bpf kselftest build is broken. The following upstream
> > > commit needs to be cherry-picked for it to build & run:
> > >
> > > """
> > > commit 4237e9f4a96228ccc8a7abe5e4b30834323cd353
> > > Author: Gilad Reti <gilad.reti@gmail.com>
> > > Date: Wed Jan 13 07:38:08 2021 +0200
> > >
> > > selftests/bpf: Add verifier test for PTR_TO_MEM spill
> > > """
> > >
> > > * On 5.15.120 there's one additional test that's failing, but I didn't
> > > debug this one:
> > >
> > > """
> > > #150/p calls: trigger reg2btf_ids[reg→type] for reg→type > __BPF_REG_TYPE_MAX FAIL
> > > FAIL
> > > """
> > >
> > > * On 5.11 onwards, building and running bpf tests is disabled by
> > > default by commit 7a6eb7c34a78498742b5f82543b7a68c1c443329, so I wonder
> > > if we want to backport this to 5.10 as well?
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > - Luiz
> > >
> >
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-07-17 19:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-07-17 13:04 [5.10, 5.15] New bpf kselftest failure Luiz Capitulino
2023-07-17 14:55 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-17 14:59 ` Luiz Capitulino
2023-07-17 19:14 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-07-17 22:57 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-18 12:31 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-18 13:23 ` Greg KH
2023-07-18 13:52 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-18 14:58 ` Luiz Capitulino
2023-07-21 5:30 ` Greg KH
2023-07-21 14:34 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-18 14:06 ` Luiz Capitulino
2023-07-18 14:35 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-07-18 14:39 ` Luiz Capitulino
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=82a3eaee09acd603a4d816952eeee1268b459906.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=gilad.reti@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=luizcap@amazon.com \
--cc=sashal@kernel.org \
--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