| 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: <00ef5a8ac678ca38cb86bd8442739478090ceed3.1490918592.git.daniel@iogearbox.net>
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 02:24:04 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: davem@...emloft.net
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com, jbacik@...com, kafai@...com,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: [PATCH net 3/3] bpf: add various verifier test cases for self-tests
Add a couple of test cases, for example, probing for xadd on a spilled
pointer to packet and map_value_adj register, various other map_value_adj
tests including the unaligned load/store, and trying out pointer arithmetic
on map_value_adj register itself. For the unaligned load/store, we need
to figure out whether the architecture has efficient unaligned access and
need to mark affected tests accordingly.
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
---
tools/include/linux/filter.h | 10 ++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 9 +-
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 270 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
3 files changed, 283 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/include/linux/filter.h b/tools/include/linux/filter.h
index 122153b..390d7c9 100644
--- a/tools/include/linux/filter.h
+++ b/tools/include/linux/filter.h
@@ -168,6 +168,16 @@
.off = OFF, \
.imm = 0 })
+/* Atomic memory add, *(uint *)(dst_reg + off16) += src_reg */
+
+#define BPF_STX_XADD(SIZE, DST, SRC, OFF) \
+ ((struct bpf_insn) { \
+ .code = BPF_STX | BPF_SIZE(SIZE) | BPF_XADD, \
+ .dst_reg = DST, \
+ .src_reg = SRC, \
+ .off = OFF, \
+ .imm = 0 })
+
/* Memory store, *(uint *) (dst_reg + off16) = imm32 */
#define BPF_ST_MEM(SIZE, DST, OFF, IMM) \
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
index 6a1ad58..9af09e8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
@@ -1,7 +1,14 @@
LIBDIR := ../../../lib
BPFDIR := $(LIBDIR)/bpf
+APIDIR := ../../../include/uapi
+GENDIR := ../../../../include/generated
+GENHDR := $(GENDIR)/autoconf.h
-CFLAGS += -Wall -O2 -I../../../include/uapi -I$(LIBDIR)
+ifneq ($(wildcard $(GENHDR)),)
+ GENFLAGS := -DHAVE_GENHDR
+endif
+
+CFLAGS += -Wall -O2 -I$(APIDIR) -I$(LIBDIR) -I$(GENDIR) $(GENFLAGS)
LDLIBS += -lcap
TEST_GEN_PROGS = test_verifier test_tag test_maps test_lru_map test_lpm_map
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 7d761d4..c848e90 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -30,6 +30,14 @@
#include <bpf/bpf.h>
+#ifdef HAVE_GENHDR
+# include "autoconf.h"
+#else
+# if defined(__i386) || defined(__x86_64) || defined(__s390x__) || defined(__aarch64__)
+# define CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS 1
+# endif
+#endif
+
#include "../../../include/linux/filter.h"
#ifndef ARRAY_SIZE
@@ -39,6 +47,8 @@
#define MAX_INSNS 512
#define MAX_FIXUPS 8
+#define F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS (1 << 0)
+
struct bpf_test {
const char *descr;
struct bpf_insn insns[MAX_INSNS];
@@ -53,6 +63,7 @@ struct bpf_test {
REJECT
} result, result_unpriv;
enum bpf_prog_type prog_type;
+ uint8_t flags;
};
/* Note we want this to be 64 bit aligned so that the end of our array is
@@ -2432,6 +2443,30 @@ struct test_val {
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
},
{
+ "direct packet access: test15 (spill with xadd)",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1,
+ offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data_end)),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 8),
+ BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_3, 8),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_5, 4096),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_4, -8),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_2, 0),
+ BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_4, BPF_REG_5, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_4, 0),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_5, 0),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .errstr = "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+ },
+ {
"helper access to packet: test1, valid packet_ptr range",
.insns = {
BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1,
@@ -2934,6 +2969,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"valid map access into an array with a variable",
@@ -2957,6 +2993,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"valid map access into an array with a signed variable",
@@ -2984,6 +3021,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a constant",
@@ -3025,6 +3063,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is outside of the array range",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a variable",
@@ -3048,6 +3087,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with no floor check",
@@ -3074,6 +3114,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a invalid max check",
@@ -3100,6 +3141,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=48 off=44 size=8",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid map access into an array with a invalid max check",
@@ -3129,6 +3171,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"multiple registers share map_lookup_elem result",
@@ -3252,6 +3295,7 @@ struct test_val {
.result = REJECT,
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"constant register |= constant should keep constant type",
@@ -3981,7 +4025,208 @@ struct test_val {
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
},
{
- "map element value (adjusted) is preserved across register spilling",
+ "map element value or null is marked on register spilling",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, -152),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_3, 0, 42),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 leaks addr",
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value store of cleared call register",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R1 !read_ok",
+ .errstr = "R1 !read_ok",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value with unaligned store",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 17),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 3),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 42),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 2, 43),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, -2, 44),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 0, 32),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 2, 33),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, -2, 34),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_8, 5),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 0, 22),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, 4, 23),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_8, -7, 24),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, 3),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, 0, 22),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, 4, 23),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, -4, 24),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value with unaligned load",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 11),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGE, BPF_REG_1, MAX_ENTRIES, 9),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 3),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 2),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_8, BPF_REG_0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_8, 2),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 5),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0, 4),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .result = ACCEPT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value illegal alu op, 1",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_AND, BPF_REG_0, 8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value illegal alu op, 2",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value illegal alu op, 3",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_DIV, BPF_REG_0, 42),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value illegal alu op, 4",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_ENDIAN(BPF_FROM_BE, BPF_REG_0, 64),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
+ .errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value illegal alu op, 5",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, 0, 0),
+ BPF_LD_MAP_FD(BPF_REG_1, 0),
+ BPF_EMIT_CALL(BPF_FUNC_map_lookup_elem),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, 7),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_3, 4096),
+ BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
+ BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
+ BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_0, 0),
+ BPF_STX_XADD(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_3, 0),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2, 0),
+ BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, 0, 22),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .fixup_map2 = { 3 },
+ .errstr_unpriv = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ .result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ },
+ {
+ "map element value is preserved across register spilling",
.insns = {
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_10),
BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_2, -8),
@@ -4003,6 +4248,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic prohibited",
.result = ACCEPT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"helper access to variable memory: stack, bitwise AND + JMP, correct bounds",
@@ -4441,6 +4687,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"invalid range check",
@@ -4472,6 +4719,7 @@ struct test_val {
.errstr = "R0 min value is negative, either use unsigned index or do a if (index >=0) check.",
.result = REJECT,
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
}
};
@@ -4550,11 +4798,11 @@ static void do_test_fixup(struct bpf_test *test, struct bpf_insn *prog,
static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
int *passes, int *errors)
{
+ int fd_prog, expected_ret, reject_from_alignment;
struct bpf_insn *prog = test->insns;
int prog_len = probe_filter_length(prog);
int prog_type = test->prog_type;
int fd_f1 = -1, fd_f2 = -1, fd_f3 = -1;
- int fd_prog, expected_ret;
const char *expected_err;
do_test_fixup(test, prog, &fd_f1, &fd_f2, &fd_f3);
@@ -4567,8 +4815,19 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
test->result_unpriv : test->result;
expected_err = unpriv && test->errstr_unpriv ?
test->errstr_unpriv : test->errstr;
+
+ reject_from_alignment = fd_prog < 0 &&
+ (test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) &&
+ strstr(bpf_vlog, "Unknown alignment.");
+#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+ if (reject_from_alignment) {
+ printf("FAIL\nFailed due to alignment despite having efficient unaligned access: '%s'!\n",
+ strerror(errno));
+ goto fail_log;
+ }
+#endif
if (expected_ret == ACCEPT) {
- if (fd_prog < 0) {
+ if (fd_prog < 0 && !reject_from_alignment) {
printf("FAIL\nFailed to load prog '%s'!\n",
strerror(errno));
goto fail_log;
@@ -4578,14 +4837,15 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
printf("FAIL\nUnexpected success to load!\n");
goto fail_log;
}
- if (!strstr(bpf_vlog, expected_err)) {
+ if (!strstr(bpf_vlog, expected_err) && !reject_from_alignment) {
printf("FAIL\nUnexpected error message!\n");
goto fail_log;
}
}
(*passes)++;
- printf("OK\n");
+ printf("OK%s\n", reject_from_alignment ?
+ " (NOTE: reject due to unknown alignment)" : "");
close_fds:
close(fd_prog);
close(fd_f1);
--
1.9.3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists