netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: make sure signal interrupts BPF_PROG_TEST

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <d75c2c4b-d96f-b149-bca9-28b89f64d59a@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Mon, 25 Feb 2019 22:37:54 +0100
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: make sure signal interrupts
 BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN

On 02/21/2019 08:11 PM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> Simple test that I used to reproduce the issue in the previous commit:
> Do BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN with max iterations, each program is 4096 simple
> move instructions. File alarm in 0.1 second and check that
> bpf_prog_test_run is interrupted (i.e. test doesn't hang).
> 
> Note: reposting this for bpf-next to avoid linux-next conflict. In this
> version I test both BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER (which uses generic
> bpf_test_run implementation) and BPF_PROG_TYPE_FLOW_DISSECTOR (which has
> it own loop with preempt handling in bpf_prog_test_run_flow_dissector).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>

Applied, thanks!