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
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 15:52:25 -0800
From: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, shuah@...nel.org, andrii@...nel.org, 
	steffen.klassert@...unet.com, antony.antony@...unet.com, 
	alexei.starovoitov@...il.com, yonghong.song@...ux.dev, eddyz87@...il.com, 
	mykolal@...com, martin.lau@...ux.dev, song@...nel.org, 
	john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...gle.com, 
	haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, devel@...ux-ipsec.org, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next v3 5/9] libbpf: selftests: Add verifier tests
 for CO-RE bitfield writes

On Fri, Dec 1, 2023 at 12:24 PM Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz> wrote:
>
> Add some tests that exercise BPF_CORE_WRITE_BITFIELD() macro. Since some
> non-trivial bit fiddling is going on, make sure various edge cases (such
> as adjacent bitfields and bitfields at the edge of structs) are
> exercised.
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Xu <dxu@...uu.xyz>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c       |   2 +
>  .../bpf/progs/verifier_bitfield_write.c       | 100 ++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 102 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bitfield_write.c
>

LGTM, but I'm not sure why we need all those __failure_unpriv, see
below. Regardless:

Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>

> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> index 5cfa7a6316b6..67b4948865a3 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
>  #include "verifier_and.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_array_access.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_basic_stack.skel.h"
> +#include "verifier_bitfield_write.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_bounds.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_bounds_deduction.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_bounds_deduction_non_const.skel.h"
> @@ -115,6 +116,7 @@ static void run_tests_aux(const char *skel_name,
>
>  void test_verifier_and(void)                  { RUN(verifier_and); }
>  void test_verifier_basic_stack(void)          { RUN(verifier_basic_stack); }
> +void test_verifier_bitfield_write(void)       { RUN(verifier_bitfield_write); }
>  void test_verifier_bounds(void)               { RUN(verifier_bounds); }
>  void test_verifier_bounds_deduction(void)     { RUN(verifier_bounds_deduction); }
>  void test_verifier_bounds_deduction_non_const(void)     { RUN(verifier_bounds_deduction_non_const); }
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bitfield_write.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bitfield_write.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..8fe355a19ba6
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bitfield_write.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,100 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
> +
> +#include <linux/bpf.h>
> +#include <stdint.h>
> +
> +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> +#include <bpf/bpf_core_read.h>
> +
> +#include "bpf_misc.h"
> +
> +struct core_reloc_bitfields {
> +       /* unsigned bitfields */
> +       uint8_t         ub1: 1;
> +       uint8_t         ub2: 2;
> +       uint32_t        ub7: 7;
> +       /* signed bitfields */
> +       int8_t          sb4: 4;
> +       int32_t         sb20: 20;
> +       /* non-bitfields */
> +       uint32_t        u32;
> +       int32_t         s32;
> +} __attribute__((preserve_access_index));
> +
> +SEC("tc")
> +__description("single CO-RE bitfield roundtrip")
> +__btf_path("btf__core_reloc_bitfields.bpf.o")
> +__success __failure_unpriv

do we want __failure_unpriv at all? Is this failure related to
*bitfield* logic at all?

> +__retval(3)
> +int single_field_roundtrip(struct __sk_buff *ctx)
> +{
> +       struct core_reloc_bitfields bitfields;
> +
> +       __builtin_memset(&bitfields, 0, sizeof(bitfields));
> +       BPF_CORE_WRITE_BITFIELD(&bitfields, ub2, 3);
> +       return BPF_CORE_READ_BITFIELD(&bitfields, ub2);
> +}
> +

[...]

Powered by blists - more mailing lists