| 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: <20210826193922.66204-28-jolsa@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 21:39:22 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@...com>,
"Steven Rostedt (VMware)" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...omium.org>, Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>,
Viktor Malik <vmalik@...hat.com>
Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v4 27/27] selftests/bpf: Add ret_mod multi func test
Adding extra test to existing modify_return test to
test this with multi func program attached on top
of the modify return program.
Because the supported wildcards do not allow us to
match both bpf_fentry_test* and bpf_modify_return_test,
adding extra code to look it up in kernel's BTF.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
---
.../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c | 114 +++++++++++++++++-
.../selftests/bpf/progs/multi_modify_return.c | 17 +++
2 files changed, 128 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/multi_modify_return.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c
index 97fec70c600b..9876104ad5b2 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/modify_return.c
@@ -5,13 +5,100 @@
*/
#include <test_progs.h>
+#include <bpf/btf.h>
#include "modify_return.skel.h"
+#include "multi_modify_return.skel.h"
#define LOWER(x) ((x) & 0xffff)
#define UPPER(x) ((x) >> 16)
-static void run_test(__u32 input_retval, __u16 want_side_effect, __s16 want_ret)
+struct multi_data {
+ struct multi_modify_return *skel;
+ int link_fentry;
+ int link_fexit;
+ __u32 btf_ids[9];
+};
+
+static int multi_btf_ids(struct multi_data *md)
+{
+ __u32 i, nr_types, ids_cnt;
+ struct btf *btf;
+
+ btf = btf__load_vmlinux_btf();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(btf, "btf__load_vmlinux_btf"))
+ return -1;
+
+ nr_types = btf__get_nr_types(btf);
+
+ for (i = 1; i <= nr_types; i++) {
+ const struct btf_type *t = btf__type_by_id(btf, i);
+ const char *name;
+ bool match;
+
+ if (!btf_is_func(t))
+ continue;
+
+ name = btf__name_by_offset(btf, t->name_off);
+ if (!name)
+ continue;
+ match = strncmp(name, "bpf_modify_return_test",
+ sizeof("bpf_modify_return_test") - 1) == 0;
+ match |= strncmp(name, "bpf_fentry_test",
+ sizeof("bpf_fentry_test") - 1) == 0;
+ if (!match)
+ continue;
+
+ md->btf_ids[ids_cnt] = i;
+ ids_cnt++;
+ }
+
+ btf__free(btf);
+ return ASSERT_EQ(ids_cnt, 9, "multi_btf_ids") ? 0 : -1;
+}
+
+static int multi_attach(struct multi_data *md)
+{
+ DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_link_create_opts, opts);
+ int prog_fd;
+
+ md->skel = multi_modify_return__open_and_load();
+ if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(md->skel, "multi_attach_check__load"))
+ return -1;
+
+ opts.multi.btf_ids = md->btf_ids;
+ opts.multi.btf_ids_cnt = 9;
+
+ prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(md->skel->progs.test1);
+
+ md->link_fentry = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, 0, BPF_TRACE_FENTRY, &opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(md->link_fentry, 0, "bpf_link_create"))
+ goto cleanup;
+
+ prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(md->skel->progs.test2);
+
+ md->link_fexit = bpf_link_create(prog_fd, 0, BPF_TRACE_FEXIT, &opts);
+ if (!ASSERT_GE(md->link_fexit, 0, "bpf_link_create"))
+ goto cleanup_close;
+
+ return 0;
+
+cleanup_close:
+ close(md->link_fentry);
+cleanup:
+ multi_modify_return__destroy(md->skel);
+ return -1;
+}
+
+static void multi_detach(struct multi_data *md)
+{
+ close(md->link_fentry);
+ close(md->link_fexit);
+ multi_modify_return__destroy(md->skel);
+}
+
+static void run_test(__u32 input_retval, __u16 want_side_effect, __s16 want_ret,
+ struct multi_data *md)
{
struct modify_return *skel = NULL;
int err, prog_fd;
@@ -27,6 +114,9 @@ static void run_test(__u32 input_retval, __u16 want_side_effect, __s16 want_ret)
if (CHECK(err, "modify_return", "attach failed: %d\n", err))
goto cleanup;
+ if (md && !ASSERT_OK(multi_attach(md), "multi_attach"))
+ goto cleanup;
+
skel->bss->input_retval = input_retval;
prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(skel->progs.fmod_ret_test);
err = bpf_prog_test_run(prog_fd, 1, NULL, 0, NULL, 0,
@@ -49,17 +139,35 @@ static void run_test(__u32 input_retval, __u16 want_side_effect, __s16 want_ret)
CHECK(skel->bss->fmod_ret_result != 1, "modify_return",
"fmod_ret failed\n");
+ if (md)
+ multi_detach(md);
cleanup:
modify_return__destroy(skel);
}
void test_modify_return(void)
{
+ struct multi_data data = {};
+
+ run_test(0 /* input_retval */,
+ 1 /* want_side_effect */,
+ 4 /* want_ret */,
+ NULL /* no multi func test */);
+ run_test(-EINVAL /* input_retval */,
+ 0 /* want_side_effect */,
+ -EINVAL /* want_ret */,
+ NULL /* no multi func test */);
+
+ if (!ASSERT_OK(multi_btf_ids(&data), "multi_attach"))
+ return;
+
run_test(0 /* input_retval */,
1 /* want_side_effect */,
- 4 /* want_ret */);
+ 4 /* want_ret */,
+ &data);
run_test(-EINVAL /* input_retval */,
0 /* want_side_effect */,
- -EINVAL /* want_ret */);
+ -EINVAL /* want_ret */,
+ &data);
}
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/multi_modify_return.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/multi_modify_return.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..34754e438c96
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/multi_modify_return.c
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+#include <linux/bpf.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
+#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
+
+char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
+SEC("fentry.multi/bpf_fentry_test*")
+int BPF_PROG(test1, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("fexit.multi/bpf_fentry_test*")
+int BPF_PROG(test2, __u64 a, __u64 b, __u64 c, __u64 d, __u64 e, __u64 f, int ret)
+{
+ return 0;
+}
--
2.31.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists