linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: add testcase for FENTRY/FEXIT with 6+ arguments

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: <69103b6f490309c381432cae5fdabf02d80a4397.camel@linux.ibm.com>
Date:   Fri, 02 Jun 2023 10:24:39 +0200
From:   Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     menglong8.dong@...il.com, olsajiri@...il.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org,
        daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev,
        song@...nel.org, yhs@...com, john.fastabend@...il.com,
        kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com, haoluo@...gle.com,
        jolsa@...nel.org, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com,
        bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, x86@...nel.org,
        hpa@...or.com, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, mykolal@...com, shuah@...nel.org,
        benbjiang@...cent.com, imagedong@...cent.com, xukuohai@...wei.com,
        chantr4@...il.com, zwisler@...gle.com, eddyz87@...il.com,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 5/5] selftests/bpf: add testcase for
 FENTRY/FEXIT with 6+ arguments

On Fri, 2023-06-02 at 14:59 +0800, menglong8.dong@...il.com wrote:
> From: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
> 
> Add test7/test12/test14 in fexit_test.c and fentry_test.c to test the
> fentry and fexit whose target function have 7/12/14 arguments.
> 
> And the testcases passed:
> 
> ./test_progs -t fexit
> $71      fentry_fexit:OK
> $73/1    fexit_bpf2bpf/target_no_callees:OK
> $73/2    fexit_bpf2bpf/target_yes_callees:OK
> $73/3    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace:OK
> $73/4    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_verify:OK
> $73/5    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_sockmap_update:OK
> $73/6    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_return_code:OK
> $73/7    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_map_prog_compatibility:OK
> $73/8    fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_multi:OK
> $73/9    fexit_bpf2bpf/fmod_ret_freplace:OK
> $73/10   fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_global_func:OK
> $73/11   fexit_bpf2bpf/fentry_to_cgroup_bpf:OK
> $73/12   fexit_bpf2bpf/func_replace_progmap:OK
> $73      fexit_bpf2bpf:OK
> $74      fexit_sleep:OK
> $75      fexit_stress:OK
> $76      fexit_test:OK
> Summary: 5/12 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> 
> ./test_progs -t fentry
> $71      fentry_fexit:OK
> $72      fentry_test:OK
> $140     module_fentry_shadow:OK
> Summary: 3/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
> 
> Reviewed-by: Jiang Biao <benbjiang@...cent.com>
> Signed-off-by: Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>
> ---
>  net/bpf/test_run.c                            | 30 +++++++++++++++-
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fentry_test.c | 34
> ++++++++++++++++++
>  .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/fexit_test.c  | 35
> +++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 98 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Don't you also need

--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/fentry_fexit.c
@@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ void test_fentry_fexit(void)
        fentry_res = (__u64 *)fentry_skel->bss;
        fexit_res = (__u64 *)fexit_skel->bss;
        printf("%lld\n", fentry_skel->bss->test1_result);
-       for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
+       for (i = 0; i < 11; i++) {
                ASSERT_EQ(fentry_res[i], 1, "fentry result");
                ASSERT_EQ(fexit_res[i], 1, "fexit result");
        }

to verify the results of the new tests?