| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAErzpmtu0=_j23ipTh9CGYKXRwxH4nqGptZX7Pd55PFvWLq4rw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 10:23:13 +0800
From: Donglin Peng <dolinux.peng@...il.com>
To: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, pengdonglin <pengdonglin@...omi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 2/3] selftests/bpf: add tests for BTF type permutation
On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 2:53 AM Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2025-10-27 at 21:54 +0800, Donglin Peng wrote:
> > Verify that BTF type permutation functionality works correctly.
> >
> > Cc: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>
> > Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> > Cc: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
> > Cc: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@...cle.com>
> > Cc: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: pengdonglin <pengdonglin@...omi.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Donglin Peng <dolinux.peng@...il.com>
> > ---
>
> Do we need a test case for split btf?
> We probably do, as there is index arithmetic etc.
Thanks, I will add a test case for split btf.
>
> [...]
>
> > @@ -8022,6 +8026,72 @@ static struct btf_dedup_test dedup_tests[] = {
> > BTF_STR_SEC("\0foo\0x\0y\0foo_ptr"),
> > },
> > },
> > +{
> > + .descr = "permute: func/func_param/struct/struct_member tags",
> > + .input = {
> > + .raw_types = {
> > + /* int */
> > + BTF_TYPE_INT_ENC(0, BTF_INT_SIGNED, 0, 32, 4), /* [1] */
> > + /* void f(int a1, int a2) */
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ENC(0, 2), /* [2] */
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ARG_ENC(NAME_NTH(1), 1),
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ARG_ENC(NAME_NTH(2), 1),
> > + BTF_FUNC_ENC(NAME_NTH(3), 2), /* [3] */
> > + /* struct t {int m1; int m2;} */
> > + BTF_STRUCT_ENC(NAME_NTH(4), 2, 8), /* [4] */
> > + BTF_MEMBER_ENC(NAME_NTH(5), 1, 0),
> > + BTF_MEMBER_ENC(NAME_NTH(6), 1, 32),
> > + /* tag -> f: tag1, tag2, tag3 */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 3, -1), /* [5] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 3, -1), /* [6] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 3, -1), /* [7] */
> > + /* tag -> f/a2: tag1, tag2, tag3 */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 3, 1), /* [8] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 3, 1), /* [9] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 3, 1), /* [10] */
> > + /* tag -> t: tag1, tag2, tag3 */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 4, -1), /* [11] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 4, -1), /* [12] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 4, -1), /* [13] */
> > + /* tag -> t/m2: tag1, tag3 */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 4, 1), /* [14] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 4, 1), /* [15] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 4, 1), /* [16] */
> > + BTF_END_RAW,
> > + },
> > + BTF_STR_SEC("\0a1\0a2\0f\0t\0m1\0m2\0tag1\0tag2\0tag3"),
> > + },
>
> Nit: I think that this test is a bit too large.
> Having fewer decl_tags would still test what we want to test.
Thanks, I agree, I will clean it up.
>
> > + .expect = {
> > + .raw_types = {
> > + BTF_FUNC_ENC(NAME_NTH(3), 16), /* [1] */
> > + BTF_STRUCT_ENC(NAME_NTH(4), 2, 8), /* [2] */
> > + BTF_MEMBER_ENC(NAME_NTH(5), 15, 0),
> > + BTF_MEMBER_ENC(NAME_NTH(6), 15, 32),
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 1, -1), /* [3] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 1, 1), /* [4] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 2, -1), /* [5] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(7), 2, 1), /* [6] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 1, -1), /* [7] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 1, 1), /* [8] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 2, -1), /* [9] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(8), 2, 1), /* [10] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 1, -1), /* [11] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 1, 1), /* [12] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 2, -1), /* [13] */
> > + BTF_DECL_TAG_ENC(NAME_NTH(9), 2, 1), /* [14] */
> > + BTF_TYPE_INT_ENC(0, BTF_INT_SIGNED, 0, 32, 4), /* [15] */
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ENC(0, 2), /* [16] */
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ARG_ENC(NAME_NTH(1), 15),
> > + BTF_FUNC_PROTO_ARG_ENC(NAME_NTH(2), 15),
> > + BTF_END_RAW,
> > + },
> > + BTF_STR_SEC("\0a1\0a2\0f\0t\0m1\0m2\0tag1\0tag2\0tag3"),
> > + },
> > + .permute = true,
> > + .permute_opts = {
> > + .ids = permute_ids_sort_by_kind_name,
> > + },
> > +},
> > };
>
> [...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists