| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <CAEf4Bzbud5EWAo9E=95VzGeCZGLA9_MdQUrAc8unh3izXcd3AA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 12:13:45 -0800
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
Cc: bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>,
Lorenz Bauer <lmb@...udflare.com>, shaun@...era.io,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@...nel.org>,
Marek Majkowski <marek@...udflare.com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, eyal.birger@...il.com,
colrack@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next V9 7/7] bpf/selftests: tests using bpf_check_mtu BPF-helper
On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:30 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
<brouer@...hat.com> wrote:
>
> Adding selftest for BPF-helper bpf_check_mtu(). Making sure
> it can be used from both XDP and TC.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
> ---
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c | 204 ++++++++++++++++++++
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_check_mtu.c | 196 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 400 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_check_mtu.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..b5d0c3a9abe8
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +/* Copyright (c) 2020 Jesper Dangaard Brouer */
> +
> +#include <linux/if_link.h> /* before test_progs.h, avoid bpf_util.h redefines */
> +
> +#include <test_progs.h>
> +#include "test_check_mtu.skel.h"
> +#include <network_helpers.h>
> +
> +#include <stdlib.h>
> +#include <inttypes.h>
> +
> +#define IFINDEX_LO 1
> +
> +static __u32 duration; /* Hint: needed for CHECK macro */
> +
> +static int read_mtu_device_lo(void)
> +{
> + const char *filename = "/sys/devices/virtual/net/lo/mtu";
> + char buf[11] = {};
> + int value;
> + int fd;
> +
> + fd = open(filename, 0, O_RDONLY);
> + if (fd == -1)
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf)) == -1)
close fd missing here?
> + return -2;
> + close(fd);
> +
> + value = strtoimax(buf, NULL, 10);
> + if (errno == ERANGE)
> + return -3;
> +
> + return value;
> +}
> +
> +static void test_check_mtu_xdp_attach(struct bpf_program *prog)
> +{
> + int err = 0;
> + int fd;
> +
> + fd = bpf_program__fd(prog);
> + err = bpf_set_link_xdp_fd(IFINDEX_LO, fd, XDP_FLAGS_SKB_MODE);
> + if (CHECK(err, "XDP-attach", "failed"))
> + return;
> +
> + bpf_set_link_xdp_fd(IFINDEX_LO, -1, 0);
can you please use bpf_link-based bpf_program__attach_xdp() which will
provide auto-cleanup in case of crash?
also check that it succeeded?
> +}
> +
> +static void test_check_mtu_run_xdp(struct test_check_mtu *skel,
> + struct bpf_program *prog,
> + __u32 mtu_expect)
> +{
> + const char *prog_name = bpf_program__name(prog);
> + int retval_expect = XDP_PASS;
> + __u32 mtu_result = 0;
> + char buf[256];
> + int err;
> +
> + struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr tattr = {
> + .repeat = 1,
> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
> + .data_out = buf,
> + .data_size_out = sizeof(buf),
> + .prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(prog),
> + };
nit: it's a variable declaration, so keep it all in one block. There
is also opts-based variant, which might be good to use here instead.
> +
> + memset(buf, 0, sizeof(buf));
char buf[256] = {}; would make this unnecessary
> +
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&tattr);
> + CHECK_ATTR(err != 0 || errno != 0, "bpf_prog_test_run",
> + "prog_name:%s (err %d errno %d retval %d)\n",
> + prog_name, err, errno, tattr.retval);
> +
> + CHECK(tattr.retval != retval_expect, "retval",
whitespaces are off?
> + "progname:%s unexpected retval=%d expected=%d\n",
> + prog_name, tattr.retval, retval_expect);
> +
> + /* Extract MTU that BPF-prog got */
> + mtu_result = skel->bss->global_bpf_mtu_xdp;
> + CHECK(mtu_result != mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user",
> + "failed (MTU user:%d bpf:%d)", mtu_expect, mtu_result);
There is nicer ASSERT_EQ() macro for such cases:
ASSERT_EQ(mtu_result, mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user"); it will format
sensible error message automatically
> +}
> +
[...]
> + char buf[256];
> + int err;
> +
> + struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr tattr = {
> + .repeat = 1,
> + .data_in = &pkt_v4,
> + .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
> + .data_out = buf,
> + .data_size_out = sizeof(buf),
> + .prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(prog),
> + };
> +
> + memset(buf, 0, sizeof(buf));
> +
same as above
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&tattr);
> + CHECK_ATTR(err != 0 || errno != 0, "bpf_prog_test_run",
> + "prog_name:%s (err %d errno %d retval %d)\n",
> + prog_name, err, errno, tattr.retval);
> +
> + CHECK(tattr.retval != retval_expect, "retval",
same :)
> + "progname:%s unexpected retval=%d expected=%d\n",
> + prog_name, tattr.retval, retval_expect);
> +
> + /* Extract MTU that BPF-prog got */
> + mtu_result = skel->bss->global_bpf_mtu_tc;
> + CHECK(mtu_result != mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user",
> + "failed (MTU user:%d bpf:%d)", mtu_expect, mtu_result);
> +}
> +
> +
[...]
> +
> +void test_check_mtu(void)
> +{
> + struct test_check_mtu *skel;
> + __u32 mtu_lo;
> +
> + skel = test_check_mtu__open_and_load();
> + if (CHECK(!skel, "open and load skel", "failed"))
> + return; /* Exit if e.g. helper unknown to kernel */
> +
> + if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-attach"))
> + test_check_mtu_xdp_attach(skel->progs.xdp_use_helper_basic);
> +
> + test_check_mtu__destroy(skel);
here it's not clear why you instantiate skeleton outside of
test_check_mtu_xdp_attach() subtest. Can you please move it in? It
will keep this failure local to that specific subtest, not the entire
test. And is just cleaner, of course.
> +
> + mtu_lo = read_mtu_device_lo();
> + if (CHECK(mtu_lo < 0, "reading MTU value", "failed (err:%d)", mtu_lo))
ASSERT_OK() could be used here
> + return;
> +
> + if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-run"))
> + test_check_mtu_xdp(mtu_lo, 0);
> +
> + if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-run ifindex-lookup"))
> + test_check_mtu_xdp(mtu_lo, IFINDEX_LO);
> +
> + if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu TC-run"))
> + test_check_mtu_tc(mtu_lo, 0);
> +
> + if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu TC-run ifindex-lookup"))
> + test_check_mtu_tc(mtu_lo, IFINDEX_LO);
> +}
[...]
> +
> + global_bpf_mtu_tc = mtu_len;
> + return retval;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("classifier")
nice use of the same SEC()'tion BPF programs!
> +int tc_minus_delta(struct __sk_buff *ctx)
> +{
> + int retval = BPF_OK; /* Expected retval on successful test */
> + __u32 ifindex = GLOBAL_USER_IFINDEX;
> + __u32 skb_len = ctx->len;
> + __u32 mtu_len = 0;
> + int delta;
> +
> + /* Boarderline test case: Minus delta exceeding packet length allowed */
> + delta = -((skb_len - ETH_HLEN) + 1);
> +
> + /* Minus length (adjusted via delta) still pass MTU check, other helpers
> + * are responsible for catching this, when doing actual size adjust
> + */
> + if (bpf_check_mtu(ctx, ifindex, &mtu_len, delta, 0))
> + retval = BPF_DROP;
> +
> + global_bpf_mtu_xdp = mtu_len;
> + return retval;
> +}
>
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists