[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAPhsuW4c-Ps0YwFBnm2FuxEgM13vBbe+m=fFHA6JQMSe8ubC9g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Oct 2021 14:48:00 -0700
From: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
To: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Cc: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>,
bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...hat.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v1 5/6] bpf: selftests: Fix fd cleanup in
sk_lookup test
On Tue, Oct 5, 2021 at 11:50 PM Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Oct 06, 2021 at 02:28 AM CEST, Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi wrote:
> > Similar to the fix in commit:
> > e31eec77e4ab (bpf: selftests: Fix fd cleanup in get_branch_snapshot)
> >
> > We use memset to set fds to -1 without breaking on future changes to
> > the array size (when MAX_SERVER constant is bumped).
> >
> > The particular close(0) occurs on non-reuseport tests, so it can be seen
> > with -n 115/{2,3} but not 115/4. This can cause problems with future
> > tests if they depend on BTF fd never being acquired as fd 0, breaking
> > internal libbpf assumptions.
> >
> > Cc: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
> > Fixes: 0ab5539f8584 (selftests/bpf: Tests for BPF_SK_LOOKUP attach point)
Similar to Andrii's comment in 6/6, we need add " to the Fixes tag.
> > Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@...il.com>
Acked-by: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
>
> Reviewed-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@...udflare.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists