[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7d703c4c-1a24-4806-a483-c02efb666059@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2023 19:28:24 -0700
From: Kui-Feng Lee <sinquersw@...il.com>
To: Yuran Pereira <yuran.pereira@...mail.com>, yonghong.song@...ux.dev
Cc: shuah@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net,
andrii@...nel.org, martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org,
john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com,
haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, mykolal@...com,
brauner@...nel.org, iii@...ux.ibm.com, kuifeng@...a.com,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Add malloc failure checks in
bpf_iter
Thank you for the patches.
I found you have two patches in this set.
You can generate both patch at once with git format-patch.
format-patch will give each patch a number in their order.
For example, the subject of this message will be
[PATCH bpf-next 2/2] selftest/bpf: Add malloc ....
And, you put both patches in the same directory. And sent them at once
by giving the path of the directory. For example,
git send-email --to=bpf@...r.kernel.org path/to/the/directory/
These patches will be sent in a thread instead of two independent
messages.
On 10/24/23 18:52, Yuran Pereira wrote:
> Since some malloc calls in bpf_iter may at times fail,
> this patch adds the appropriate fail checks, and ensures that
> any previously allocated resource is appropriately destroyed
> before returning the function.
>
> This is patch 2 in the sequence should be applied after d1a88d37cecc
> "selftests/bpf: Convert CHECK macros to ASSERT_* macros in bpf_iter"
>
> Patch 1:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/DB3PR10MB683589A5F705C6CA5BE0D325E8DFA@DB3PR10MB6835.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuran Pereira <yuran.pereira@...mail.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c | 10 +++++++++-
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
> index 526ac4e741ee..c6cf42c64af3 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/bpf_iter.c
> @@ -700,7 +700,7 @@ static void test_overflow(bool test_e2big_overflow, bool ret1)
> goto free_link;
>
> buf = malloc(expected_read_len);
> - if (!buf)
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(buf, "malloc"))
> goto close_iter;
>
> /* do read */
> @@ -871,6 +871,10 @@ static void test_bpf_percpu_hash_map(void)
>
> skel->rodata->num_cpus = bpf_num_possible_cpus();
> val = malloc(8 * bpf_num_possible_cpus());
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(val, "malloc")) {
> + bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_hash_map__destroy(skel);
> + return;
> + }
You can just do "goto out;" here.
>
> err = bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_hash_map__load(skel);
> if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_hash_map__load"))
> @@ -1048,6 +1052,10 @@ static void test_bpf_percpu_array_map(void)
>
> skel->rodata->num_cpus = bpf_num_possible_cpus();
> val = malloc(8 * bpf_num_possible_cpus());
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(val, "malloc")) {
> + bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_array_map__destroy(skel);
> + return;
> + }
Same here, even it will call free(val), free(val) will do nothing when
val is NULL.
>
> err = bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_array_map__load(skel);
> if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "bpf_iter_bpf_percpu_array_map__load"))
Powered by blists - more mailing lists