netdev - [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: make reference

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: <20191021033902.3856966-7-andriin@fb.com>
Date:   Sun, 20 Oct 2019 20:39:01 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
To:     <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <ast@...com>,
        <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC:     <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>, <kernel-team@...com>,
        Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
        Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next 6/7] selftests/bpf: make reference_tracking test use subtests

reference_tracking is actually a set of 9 sub-tests. Make it explicitly so.

Also, add explicit "classifier/" prefix to BPF program section names to
let libbpf correctly guess program type. Thus, also remove explicit
bpf_prog__set_type() call.

Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
---
 .../bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c        |  3 ++-
 .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c  | 18 +++++++++---------
 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c
index 86cee820d4d3..4493ba277bd7 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/reference_tracking.c
@@ -31,7 +31,8 @@ void test_reference_tracking(void)
 		if (strstr(title, ".text") != NULL)
 			continue;
 
-		bpf_program__set_type(prog, BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS);
+		if (!test__start_subtest(title))
+			continue;
 
 		/* Expect verifier failure if test name has 'fail' */
 		if (strstr(title, "fail") != NULL) {
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c
index e21cd736c196..cb49ccb707d1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sk_lookup_kern.c
@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ static struct bpf_sock_tuple *get_tuple(void *data, __u64 nh_off,
 	return result;
 }
 
-SEC("sk_lookup_success")
+SEC("classifier/sk_lookup_success")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test0(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	void *data_end = (void *)(long)skb->data_end;
@@ -78,7 +78,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test0(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return sk ? TC_ACT_OK : TC_ACT_UNSPEC;
 }
 
-SEC("sk_lookup_success_simple")
+SEC("classifier/sk_lookup_success_simple")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test1(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test1(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_use_after_free")
+SEC("classifier/fail_use_after_free")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_uaf(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_uaf(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return family;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_modify_sk_pointer")
+SEC("classifier/fail_modify_sk_pointer")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -120,7 +120,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_modify_sk_or_null_pointer")
+SEC("classifier/fail_modify_sk_or_null_pointer")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr_or_null(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_modptr_or_null(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_no_release")
+SEC("classifier/fail_no_release")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test2(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test2(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_release_twice")
+SEC("classifier/fail_release_twice")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test3(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ int bpf_sk_lookup_test3(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	return 0;
 }
 
-SEC("fail_release_unchecked")
+SEC("classifier/fail_release_unchecked")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test4(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct bpf_sock_tuple tuple = {};
@@ -172,7 +172,7 @@ void lookup_no_release(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 	bpf_sk_lookup_tcp(skb, &tuple, sizeof(tuple), BPF_F_CURRENT_NETNS, 0);
 }
 
-SEC("fail_no_release_subcall")
+SEC("classifier/fail_no_release_subcall")
 int bpf_sk_lookup_test5(struct __sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	lookup_no_release(skb);
-- 
2.17.1