netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next] selftests/bpf: two scale tests

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]

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.