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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20191213212322.GP3105713@mini-arch>
Date:   Fri, 13 Dec 2019 13:23:22 -0800
From:   Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>
To:     Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: expose __sk_buff wire_len/gso_segs to
 BPF_PROG_TEST_RUN

On 12/13, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 9:53 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com> wrote:
> >
> > wire_len should not be less than real len and is capped by GSO_MAX_SIZE.
> > gso_segs is capped by GSO_MAX_SEGS.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
> 
> This change breaks tests:
> ./test_progs -n 16
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:prog_load sched cls 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:prog_load raw tp 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:find_prog 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:find_prog 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:find_prog 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:find global data 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:attach_raw_tp 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:attach fentry 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:attach fexit 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:find_perf_buf_map 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:perf_buf__new 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:FAIL:ipv6 err -1 errno 22 retval 0 duration 0
> on_sample:PASS:check_size 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_meta_ifindex 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_cb8_0 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_cb32_0 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_eth 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_ip 0 nsec
> on_sample:PASS:check_tcp 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:perf_buffer__poll 0 nsec
> test_kfree_skb:PASS:get_result 0 nsec
> #16 kfree_skb:FAIL
> Summary: 0/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED
Ugh, it's probably because of '__skb->wire_len < skb->len' check.
Let me take a look.

(sorry, I'm still not running/looking at full test_progs because BTF support
is WIP in our toolchain and some subtests fail because of that,
generating a bunch of noise).

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ