[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200623003119.onlwey7ko5z6heyq@ast-mbp.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 17:31:19 -0700
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
To: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>
Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, ast@...com,
daniel@...earbox.net, john.fastabend@...il.com,
andrii.nakryiko@...il.com, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 3/3] selftests/bpf: add variable-length data
concat pattern less than test
On Mon, Jun 22, 2020 at 05:09:04PM -0700, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> Extend original variable-length tests with a case to catch a common
> existing pattern of testing for < 0 for errors. Note because
> verifier also tracks upper bounds and we know it can not be greater
> than MAX_LEN here we can skip upper bound check.
>
> In ALU64 enabled compilation converting from long->int return types
> in probe helpers results in extra instruction pattern, <<= 32, s >>= 32.
> The trade-off is the non-ALU64 case works. If you really care about
> every extra insn (XDP case?) then you probably should be using original
> int type.
>
> In addition adding a sext insn to bpf might help the verifier in the
> general case to avoid these types of tricks.
>
> Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
Please keep John's 'Author:' on the patch.
git commit --author= --amend
or keep 'From:' when you applied to your local git.
Also add your SOB after John's.
Even if you didn't change the patch at all.
Same thing if you've reworked the patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists