linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add connmark read/write test

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAP01T75LMwpz3ZPSUgtX2_RDUhB33djJmJs8W--Qh4H8J9iNsQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 1 Aug 2022 16:51:52 +0200
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
To:     Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
Cc:     bpf@...r.kernel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
        andrii@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add connmark read/write test

On Sat, 30 Jul 2022 at 21:40, Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
>
> Test that the prog can read/write to/from the connection mark. This
> test is nice because it ensures progs can interact with netfilter
> subsystem correctly.
>

Commit message is a bit misleading, where are you writing to ct->mark? :)
The cover letter also mentions "reading and writing from nf_conn". Do
you have patches whitelisting nf_conn::mark for writes?
If not, drop the writing related bits from the commit log. The rest
looks ok to me.


> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c | 3 ++-
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c | 3 +++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> index 317978cac029..7232f6dcd252 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_nf.c
> @@ -44,7 +44,7 @@ static int connect_to_server(int srv_fd)
>
>  static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
>  {
> -       const char *iptables = "iptables -t raw %s PREROUTING -j CT";
> +       const char *iptables = "iptables -t raw %s PREROUTING -j CONNMARK --set-mark 42/0";
>         int srv_fd = -1, client_fd = -1, srv_client_fd = -1;
>         struct sockaddr_in peer_addr = {};
>         struct test_bpf_nf *skel;
> @@ -114,6 +114,7 @@ static void test_bpf_nf_ct(int mode)
>         /* expected status is IPS_SEEN_REPLY */
>         ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_status, 2, "Test for ct status update ");
>         ASSERT_EQ(skel->data->test_exist_lookup, 0, "Test existing connection lookup");
> +       ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_exist_lookup_mark, 43, "Test existing connection lookup ctmark");
>  end:
>         if (srv_client_fd != -1)
>                 close(srv_client_fd);
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
> index 84e0fd479794..2722441850cc 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_bpf_nf.c
> @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ __be16 sport = 0;
>  __be32 daddr = 0;
>  __be16 dport = 0;
>  int test_exist_lookup = -ENOENT;
> +u32 test_exist_lookup_mark = 0;
>
>  struct nf_conn;
>
> @@ -174,6 +175,8 @@ nf_ct_test(struct nf_conn *(*lookup_fn)(void *, struct bpf_sock_tuple *, u32,
>                        sizeof(opts_def));
>         if (ct) {
>                 test_exist_lookup = 0;
> +               if (ct->mark == 42)
> +                       test_exist_lookup_mark = 43;
>                 bpf_ct_release(ct);
>         } else {
>                 test_exist_lookup = opts_def.error;
> --
> 2.37.1
>