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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190412233248.iik56fgcnmyk3pm7@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Fri, 12 Apr 2019 16:32:50 -0700
From:   Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To:     Song Liu <liu.song.a23@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: two scale tests

On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 04:24:51PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 2:41 PM Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > Add two tests to check that sequence of 1024 jumps is verifiable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
> 
> Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
> 
> Shall we add a test that go beyond the 1M limit?

1m is not uapi limit. I'm working on the doc patch to stress that point.
Adding a test to check that it fails at 1m would kinda imply
that it is uapi and I very much want to avoid that.

The purpose of these tests is to stress the verifier to its
internal limits, but not more.
In particular in these two tests 1024, 8, 512, and another 1M
are limits too.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ