[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <21522bb6-1b9d-8f4b-ff29-352959ae57f1@fb.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 15:26:59 -0700
From: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
To: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bpf: fix byte order test in test_verifier
On 8/4/17 1:24 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> We really must check with #if __BYTE_ORDER == XYZ instead of
> just presence of #ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN. I noticed that when
> actually running this on big endian machine, the latter test
> resolves to true for user space, same for #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN.
>
> E.g., looking at endian.h from libc, both are also defined
> there, so we really must test this against __BYTE_ORDER instead
> for proper insns selection. For the kernel, such checks are
> fine though e.g. see 13da9e200fe4 ("Revert "endian: #define
> __BYTE_ORDER"") and 415586c9e6d3 ("UAPI: fix endianness conditionals
> in M32R's asm/stat.h") for some more context, but not for
> user space. Lets also make sure to properly include endian.h.
> After that, suite passes for me:
>
> ./test_verifier: ELF 64-bit MSB executable, [...]
>
> Linux foo 4.13.0-rc3+ #4 SMP Fri Aug 4 06:59:30 EDT 2017 s390x s390x s390x GNU/Linux
>
> Before fix: Summary: 505 PASSED, 11 FAILED
> After fix: Summary: 516 PASSED, 0 FAILED
>
> Fixes: 18f3d6be6be1 ("selftests/bpf: Add test cases to test narrower ctx field loads")
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 19 ++++++++++---------
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index addea82..d3ed732 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@
> * License as published by the Free Software Foundation.
> */
>
> +#include <endian.h>
> #include <asm/types.h>
> #include <linux/types.h>
> #include <stdint.h>
> @@ -1098,7 +1099,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->hash byte load permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
> #else
> @@ -1135,7 +1136,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->hash byte load not permitted 3",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 3),
> #else
> @@ -1244,7 +1245,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->hash half load permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash)),
> #else
> @@ -1259,7 +1260,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->hash half load not permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, hash) + 2),
> #else
> @@ -5422,7 +5423,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period byte load permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
> #else
> @@ -5438,7 +5439,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period half load permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
> #else
> @@ -5454,7 +5455,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check bpf_perf_event_data->sample_period word load permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct bpf_perf_event_data, sample_period)),
> #else
> @@ -5481,7 +5482,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->data half load not permitted",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, data)),
> #else
> @@ -5497,7 +5498,7 @@ struct test_val {
> "check skb->tc_classid half load not permitted for lwt prog",
> .insns = {
> BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
> -#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> +#if __BYTE_ORDER == __LITTLE_ENDIAN
> BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_H, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
> offsetof(struct __sk_buff, tc_classid)),
> #else
>
The change looks good to me.
Acked-by: Yonghong <yhs@...com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists