linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v17 11/12] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_verify_pkcs7

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: <64e8ef59363bcd0f314d4e1eb7483f4dd2b7dbcf.camel@huaweicloud.com>
Date:   Mon, 19 Sep 2022 15:09:37 +0200
From:   Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com>
To:     KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>
Cc:     ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
        martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, yhs@...com,
        john.fastabend@...il.com, sdf@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com,
        jolsa@...nel.org, mykolal@...com, dhowells@...hat.com,
        jarkko@...nel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com,
        paul@...l-moore.com, jmorris@...ei.org, serge@...lyn.com,
        shuah@...nel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, keyrings@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        deso@...teo.net, memxor@...il.com,
        Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>,
        Joanne Koong <joannelkoong@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 11/12] selftests/bpf: Add test for
 bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature() kfunc

On Mon, 2022-09-19 at 13:17 +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-09-15 at 17:11 +0100, KP Singh wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 9, 2022 at 1:10 PM Roberto Sassu
> > <roberto.sassu@...weicloud.com> wrote:
> > > From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > > 
> > 
> > [...]
> > 
> > > +}
> > > diff --git
> > > a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_verify_pkcs7_sig.c
> > > b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_verify_pkcs7_sig.c
> > > new file mode 100644
> > > index 000000000000..4ceab545d99a
> > > --- /dev/null
> > > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_verify_pkcs7_sig.c
> > > @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
> > > +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> > > +
> > > +/*
> > > + * Copyright (C) 2022 Huawei Technologies Duesseldorf GmbH
> > > + *
> > > + * Author: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@...wei.com>
> > > + */
> > > +
> > > +#include "vmlinux.h"
> > > +#include <errno.h>
> > > +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> > > +#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
> > > +
> > > +#define MAX_DATA_SIZE (1024 * 1024)
> > > +#define MAX_SIG_SIZE 1024
> > > +
> > > +typedef __u8 u8;
> > > +typedef __u16 u16;
> > > +typedef __u32 u32;
> > > +typedef __u64 u64;
> > 
> > I think you can avoid this and just use u32 and u64 directly.
> 
> Thanks, yes.
> 
> > +
> > > +struct bpf_dynptr {
> > > +       __u64 :64;
> > > +       __u64 :64;
> > > +} __attribute__((aligned(8)));
> > > +
> > 
> > I think you are doing this because including the uapi headers
> > causes
> > type conflicts.
> > This does happen quite often. What do other folks think about doing
> > something like
> > 
> > #define DYNPTR(x) ((void *)x)
> > 
> > It seems like this will be an issue anytime we use the helpers with
> > vmlinux.h and users
> > will always have to define this type in their tests.
> 
> It seems it is sufficient to use struct bpf_dynptr somehow in the
> kernel code. That causes the definition to be exported with BTF. Not
> sure what would be the proper place to do that. When I tried, I
> declared a unused variable.

Easier:

BTF_TYPE_EMIT(struct bpf_dynptr);

I added it in bpf_dynptr_from_mem(), right?

Thanks

Roberto