netdev - RE: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] transition sockmap testing to test

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]

Message-ID: <65b1962cb633e_12e2dc2089b@john.notmuch>
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2024 14:58:52 -0800
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, 
 jakub@...udflare.com, 
 bpf@...r.kernel.org
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, 
 john.fastabend@...il.com, 
 andrii@...nel.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH bpf-next v2 0/4] transition sockmap testing to test_progs

John Fastabend wrote:
> Its much easier to write and read tests than it was when sockmap was
> originally created. At that time we created a test_sockmap prog that
> did sockmap tests. But, its showing its age now. For example it reads
> user vars out of maps, is hard to run targetted tests, has a different
> format from the familiar test_progs and so on.
> 
> I recently thought there was an issue with pop helpers so I created
> some tests to try and track it down. It turns out it was a bug in the
> BPF program we had not the kernel. But, I think it makes sense to
> start deprecating test_sockmap and converting these to the nicer
> test_progs.
> 
> So this is a first round of test_prog tests for sockmap cork and
> pop helpers. I'll add push and pull tests shortly. I think its fine,
> maybe preferred to review smaller patchsets, to send these
> incrementally as I get them created.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> v2: fix unint vars in some branches from `make RELEASE=1`

I'll wait a bit to see if there is any additional feedback, but on
bpf-next these tests were stable. When we backported to 6.1
they became a bit flaky because recv() would sometimes only get
part of the msg. I'll take a look, but this should be fine adding
a retry logic to the recv() so it does a few recv's before giving
up allows it to recv partial messages, but still pass the test.

Thanks,
John