[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <67020a72-c8a5-76be-1357-e7a0f8def9fd@solarflare.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2018 23:46:17 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 2/3] bpf/verifier: update selftests
Error messages for some bad programs have changed, partly because we now
check for loops / out-of-bounds jumps before checking subprogs.
Also added a test ("calls: interleaved functions") to ensure that subprogs
are required to be contiguous.
It wasn't entirely clear to me what "calls: wrong recursive calls" was
meant to test for, since all of the JMP|CALL insns are unreachable. I've
changed it so that they are now reachable, which causes static back-edges
to be detected (since that, like insn reachability, is now tested before
subprog boundaries are determined).
Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 51 ++++++++++++++++++-----------
1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 3e7718b1a9ae..cc45a0b52439 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -646,7 +646,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.insns = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_2),
},
- .errstr = "not an exit",
+ .errstr = "jump out of range",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9442,13 +9442,13 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "last insn is not an exit or jmp",
+ .errstr = "insn 1 was in subprog 1, now 0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
"calls: wrong recursive calls",
.insns = {
- BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 4),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 3),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 4),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 1, 0, -2),
BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 1, 0, -2),
@@ -9457,7 +9457,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "jump out of range",
+ .errstr = "back-edge from insn",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9508,7 +9508,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "jump out of range",
+ .errstr = "insn 5 was in subprog 1, now 0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9787,7 +9787,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
- .errstr = "jump out of range from insn 1 to 4",
+ .errstr = "insn 5 was in subprog 1, now 0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9803,13 +9803,12 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
- offsetof(struct __sk_buff, len)),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, 0, -3),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "jump out of range from insn 11 to 9",
+ .errstr = "insn 9 was in subprog 1, now 2",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9861,7 +9860,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "invalid destination",
+ .errstr = "jump out of range from insn 2 to -1",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9873,7 +9872,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "invalid destination",
+ .errstr = "jump out of range from insn 2 to -2147483646",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9886,7 +9885,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "jump out of range",
+ .errstr = "insn 1 was in subprog 0, now 1",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9899,7 +9898,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "jump out of range",
+ .errstr = "insn 4 was in subprog 1, now 0",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9913,7 +9912,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_1, 0, -2),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "not an exit",
+ .errstr = "jump out of range from insn 5 to 6",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9927,7 +9926,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "last insn",
+ .errstr = "insn_idx 5 is in subprog 1 but that starts at 4",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9942,7 +9941,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "last insn",
+ .errstr = "insn_idx 5 is in subprog 1 but that starts at 4",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -9982,12 +9981,11 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_7, BPF_REG_0),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_7),
BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_0),
- BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1,
- offsetof(struct __sk_buff, len)),
+ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 8),
BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
- .errstr = "not an exit",
+ .errstr = "insn 10 was in subprog 2, now 1",
.result = REJECT,
},
{
@@ -11423,6 +11421,21 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
.errstr = "BPF_XADD stores into R2 packet",
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
},
+ {
+ "calls: interleaved functions",
+ .insns = {
+ BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 1, 0, 2),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 1),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 2),
+ BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 2),
+ BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JA, 0, 0, 1),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+ },
+ .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+ .errstr = "subprog 0 is non-contiguous at 5",
+ .result = REJECT,
+ },
};
static int probe_filter_length(const struct bpf_insn *fp)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists