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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 22:14:43 -0400 From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> To: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> Cc: Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>, simon.horman@...ronome.com, Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>, Petar Penkov <peterpenkov96@...il.com> Subject: Re: [RFC bpf-next v2 7/9] bpf: when doing BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN for flow dissector use no-skb mode On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 6:21 PM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> wrote: > > Now that we have __flow_bpf_dissect which works on raw data (by > constructing temporary on-stack skb), use it when doing > BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN for flow dissector. > > This should help us catch any possible bugs due to missing shinfo on > the per-cpu skb. > > Note that existing __skb_flow_bpf_dissect swallows L2 headers and returns > nhoff=0, we need to preserve the existing behavior. > > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> > --- > net/bpf/test_run.c | 48 ++++++++++++++-------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 34 deletions(-) > > @@ -300,9 +277,13 @@ int bpf_prog_test_run_flow_dissector(struct bpf_prog *prog, > preempt_disable(); > time_start = ktime_get_ns(); > for (i = 0; i < repeat; i++) { > - retval = bpf_flow_dissect_skb(prog, skb, > - &flow_keys_dissector, > - &flow_keys); > + retval = bpf_flow_dissect(prog, data, eth->h_proto, ETH_HLEN, > + size, &flow_keys_dissector, > + &flow_keys); > + if (flow_keys.nhoff >= ETH_HLEN) > + flow_keys.nhoff -= ETH_HLEN; > + if (flow_keys.thoff >= ETH_HLEN) > + flow_keys.thoff -= ETH_HLEN; why are these conditional?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists