netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Adjust data size to have ETH

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: <5e342fea-764b-48a0-afda-4adfb504bd46@linux.dev>
Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 14:09:09 -0800
From: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>
To: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>,
 Shigeru Yoshida <syoshida@...hat.com>
Cc: ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, andrii@...nel.org,
 eddyz87@...il.com, song@...nel.org, yonghong.song@...ux.dev,
 john.fastabend@...il.com, kpsingh@...nel.org, sdf@...ichev.me,
 haoluo@...gle.com, jolsa@...nel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
 edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, horms@...nel.org,
 hawk@...nel.org, lorenzo@...nel.org, toke@...hat.com, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Adjust data size to have
 ETH_HLEN

On 1/23/25 11:18 AM, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> On 01/22, Shigeru Yoshida wrote:
>> The function bpf_test_init() now returns an error if user_size
>> (.data_size_in) is less than ETH_HLEN, causing the tests to
>> fail. Adjust the data size to ensure it meets the requirement of
>> ETH_HLEN.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Shigeru Yoshida <syoshida@...hat.com>
>> ---
>>   .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c  | 4 ++--
>>   .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_devmap_attach.c  | 8 ++++----
>>   2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c
>> index c7f74f068e78..df27535995af 100644
>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c
>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/xdp_cpumap_attach.c
>> @@ -52,10 +52,10 @@ static void test_xdp_with_cpumap_helpers(void)
>>   	ASSERT_EQ(info.id, val.bpf_prog.id, "Match program id to cpumap entry prog_id");
>>   
>>   	/* send a packet to trigger any potential bugs in there */
>> -	char data[10] = {};
>> +	char data[ETH_HLEN] = {};
>>   	DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_test_run_opts, opts,
>>   			    .data_in = &data,
>> -			    .data_size_in = 10,
>> +			    .data_size_in = sizeof(data),
>>   			    .flags = BPF_F_TEST_XDP_LIVE_FRAMES,
>>   			    .repeat = 1,
>>   		);
> 
> We should still keep 10, but change the ASSERT_OK below to expect the
> error instead. Looking at the comment above, the purpose of the test
> is to exercise that error case.
> 

I think the bpf_prog_test_run_opts in this dev/cpumap test is to check the 
bpf_redirect_map() helper, so it expects the bpf_prog_test_run_opts to succeed.

It just happens the current data[10] cannot trigger the fixed bug because the 
bpf prog returns a XDP_REDIRECT instead of XDP_PASS, so xdp_recv_frames is not 
called.

To test patch 1, a separate test is probably needed to trigger the bug in 
xdp_recv_frames() with a bpf prog returning XDP_PASS.