netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf] selftests: bpf: add zero extend checks for ALU32 and/or/xor

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: <c1f90672-d2ce-0ac9-10d1-08208575f193@iogearbox.net>
Date:   Thu, 23 May 2019 16:02:42 +0200
From:   Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To:     Y Song <ys114321@...il.com>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
Cc:     Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf] selftests: bpf: add zero extend checks for ALU32
 and/or/xor

On 05/23/2019 08:38 AM, Y Song wrote:
> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 1:46 PM Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 22 May 2019 at 20:13, Y Song <ys114321@...il.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, May 22, 2019 at 2:25 AM Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Add three tests to test_verifier/basic_instr that make sure that the
>>>> high 32-bits of the destination register is cleared after an ALU32
>>>> and/or/xor.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...il.com>
>>>
>>> I think the patch intends for bpf-next, right? The patch itself looks
>>> good to me.
>>> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>
>>
>> Thank you. Actually, it was intended for the bpf tree, as a test
>> follow up for this [1] fix.
> Then maybe you want to add a Fixes tag and resubmit?

Why would the test case need a fixes tag? It's common practice that we have
BPF fixes that we queue to bpf tree along with kselftest test cases related
to them. Therefore, applied as well, thanks for following up!

Björn, in my email from the fix, I mentioned we should have test snippets
ideally for all of the alu32 insns to not miss something falling through the
cracks when JITs get added or changed. If you have some cycles to add the
remaining missing ones, that would be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Daniel