| 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: <CAEf4BzZL85C7KUwKv9i5cdLSDzM175cLjiW4EDjOqNfcxbLO+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 May 2022 20:34:20 -0700
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin Lau <kafai@...com>,
Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
john fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@...com>,
Joanne Koong <joannekoong@...com>,
Geliang Tang <geliang.tang@...e.com>,
Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
duanxiongchun@...edance.com,
Muchun Song <songmuchun@...edance.com>,
Dongdong Wang <wangdongdong.6@...edance.com>,
Cong Wang <cong.wang@...edance.com>,
zhouchengming@...edance.com, yosryahmed@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: add test case for bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 2:39 AM Feng zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com> wrote:
>
> From: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
>
> test_progs:
> Tests new ebpf helpers bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem.
>
> Signed-off-by: Feng Zhou <zhoufeng.zf@...edance.com>
> ---
> .../bpf/prog_tests/map_lookup_percpu_elem.c | 46 ++++++++++++++++
> .../bpf/progs/test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.c | 54 +++++++++++++++++++
> 2 files changed, 100 insertions(+)
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
> create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_lookup_percpu_elem.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..58b24c2112b0
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,46 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +// Copyright (c) 2022 Bytedance
/* */ instead of //
> +
> +#include <test_progs.h>
> +
> +#include "test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.skel.h"
> +
> +#define TEST_VALUE 1
> +
> +void test_map_lookup_percpu_elem(void)
> +{
> + struct test_map_lookup_percpu_elem *skel;
> + int key = 0, ret;
> + int nr_cpus = sysconf(_SC_NPROCESSORS_ONLN);
I think this is actually wrong and will break selftests on systems
with offline CPUs. Please use libbpf_num_possible_cpus() instead.
> + int *buf;
> +
> + buf = (int *)malloc(nr_cpus*sizeof(int));
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(buf, "malloc"))
> + return;
> + memset(buf, 0, nr_cpus*sizeof(int));
this is wrong, kernel expects to have roundup(sz, 8) per each CPU,
while you have just 4 bytes per each element
please also have spaces around multiplication operator here and above
> + buf[0] = TEST_VALUE;
> +
> + skel = test_map_lookup_percpu_elem__open_and_load();
> + if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "test_map_lookup_percpu_elem__open_and_load"))
> + return;
buf leaking here
> + ret = test_map_lookup_percpu_elem__attach(skel);
> + ASSERT_OK(ret, "test_map_lookup_percpu_elem__attach");
> +
> + ret = bpf_map_update_elem(bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.percpu_array_map), &key, buf, 0);
> + ASSERT_OK(ret, "percpu_array_map update");
> +
> + ret = bpf_map_update_elem(bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.percpu_hash_map), &key, buf, 0);
> + ASSERT_OK(ret, "percpu_hash_map update");
> +
> + ret = bpf_map_update_elem(bpf_map__fd(skel->maps.percpu_lru_hash_map), &key, buf, 0);
> + ASSERT_OK(ret, "percpu_lru_hash_map update");
> +
> + syscall(__NR_getuid);
> +
> + ret = skel->bss->percpu_array_elem_val == TEST_VALUE &&
> + skel->bss->percpu_hash_elem_val == TEST_VALUE &&
> + skel->bss->percpu_lru_hash_elem_val == TEST_VALUE;
> + ASSERT_OK(!ret, "bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem success");
this would be better done as three separate ASSERT_EQ(), combining
into opaque true/false isn't helpful if something breaks
> +
> + test_map_lookup_percpu_elem__destroy(skel);
> +}
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..5d4ef86cbf48
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_map_lookup_percpu_elem.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +// Copyright (c) 2022 Bytedance
/* */ instead of //
> +
> +#include "vmlinux.h"
> +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> +
> +int percpu_array_elem_val = 0;
> +int percpu_hash_elem_val = 0;
> +int percpu_lru_hash_elem_val = 0;
> +
> +struct {
> + __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_ARRAY);
> + __uint(max_entries, 1);
> + __type(key, __u32);
> + __type(value, __u32);
> +} percpu_array_map SEC(".maps");
> +
> +struct {
> + __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_PERCPU_HASH);
> + __uint(max_entries, 1);
> + __type(key, __u32);
> + __type(value, __u32);
> +} percpu_hash_map SEC(".maps");
> +
> +struct {
> + __uint(type, BPF_MAP_TYPE_LRU_PERCPU_HASH);
> + __uint(max_entries, 1);
> + __type(key, __u32);
> + __type(value, __u32);
> +} percpu_lru_hash_map SEC(".maps");
> +
> +SEC("tp/syscalls/sys_enter_getuid")
> +int sysenter_getuid(const void *ctx)
> +{
> + __u32 key = 0;
> + __u32 cpu = 0;
> + __u32 *value;
> +
> + value = bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem(&percpu_array_map, &key, cpu);
> + if (value)
> + percpu_array_elem_val = *value;
> +
> + value = bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem(&percpu_hash_map, &key, cpu);
> + if (value)
> + percpu_hash_elem_val = *value;
> +
> + value = bpf_map_lookup_percpu_elem(&percpu_lru_hash_map, &key, cpu);
> + if (value)
> + percpu_lru_hash_elem_val = *value;
> +
if the test happens to run on CPU 0 then the test doesn't really test
much. It would be more interesting to have a bpf_loop() iteration that
would fetch values on each possible CPU instead and do something with
it.
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
> --
> 2.20.1
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists