Make 2-byte access to bpf_sk_lookup->remote_port endian-agnostic #167
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Master branch: ad13baf |
|
Master branch: a50cbac |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
c121c76 to
c02fc3e
Compare
|
Master branch: a50cbac |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
c02fc3e to
5525df4
Compare
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
bpf-next
branch
from
a50cbac to
e0999c8
Compare
|
Master branch: e0999c8 |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
5525df4 to
7800559
Compare
|
Master branch: e0999c8 |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
7800559 to
ac8f1b8
Compare
|
Master branch: 5a5c11e |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
ac8f1b8 to
f0dc865
Compare
|
Master branch: 6091197 |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
f0dc865 to
83f924f
Compare
|
Master branch: 6091197 |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
83f924f to
11df03f
Compare
In commit 9a69e2b ("bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide") the remote_port field has been split up and re-declared from u32 to be16. However, the accompanying changes to the context access converter have not been well thought through when it comes big-endian platforms. Today 2-byte wide loads from offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port) are handled as narrow loads from a 4-byte wide field. This by itself is not enough to create a problem, but when we combine 1. 32-bit wide access to ->remote_port backed by a 16-wide wide load, with 2. inherent difference between litte- and big-endian in how narrow loads need have to be handled (see bpf_ctx_narrow_access_offset), we get inconsistent results for a 2-byte loads from &ctx->remote_port on LE and BE architectures. This in turn makes BPF C code for the common case of 2-byte load from ctx->remote_port not portable. To rectify it, inform the context access converter that remote_port is 2-byte wide field, and only 1-byte loads need to be treated as narrow loads. At the same time, we special-case the 4-byte load from &ctx->remote_port to continue handling it the same way as do today, in order to keep the existing BPF programs working. Fixes: 9a69e2b ("bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide") Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
In commit 9a69e2b ("bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide") ->remote_port field changed from __u32 to __be16. However, narrow load tests which exercise 1-byte sized loads from offsetof(struct bpf_sk_lookup, remote_port) were not adopted to reflect the change. As a result, on little-endian we continue testing loads from addresses: - (__u8 *)&ctx->remote_port + 3 - (__u8 *)&ctx->remote_port + 4 which map to the zero padding following the remote_port field, and don't break the tests because there is no observable change. While on big-endian, we observe breakage because tests expect to see zeros for values loaded from: - (__u8 *)&ctx->remote_port - 1 - (__u8 *)&ctx->remote_port - 2 Above addresses map to ->remote_ip6 field, which precedes ->remote_port, and are populated during the bpf_sk_lookup IPv6 tests. Unsurprisingly, on s390x we observe: #136/38 sk_lookup/narrow access to ctx v4:OK #136/39 sk_lookup/narrow access to ctx v6:FAIL Fix it by removing the checks for 1-byte loads from offsets outside of the ->remote_port field. Fixes: 9a69e2b ("bpf: Make remote_port field in struct bpf_sk_lookup 16-bit wide") Suggested-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <iii@linux.ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
The context access converter rewrites the 4-byte load from bpf_sk_lookup->remote_port to a 2-byte load from bpf_sk_lookup_kern structure. It means that we cannot treat the destination register contents as a 32-bit value, or the code will not be portable across big- and little-endian architectures. This is exactly the same case as with 4-byte loads from bpf_sock->dst_port so follow the approach outlined in [1] and treat the register contents as a 16-bit value in the test. [1]: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220317113920.1068535-5-jakub@cloudflare.com/ Fixes: 2ed0dc5 ("selftests/bpf: Cover 4-byte load from remote_port in bpf_sk_lookup") Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <jakub@cloudflare.com>
|
Master branch: 63cc8e2 |
kernel-patches-bot
force-pushed
the
series/624326=>bpf-next
branch
from
11df03f to
13b33b2
Compare
|
At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=624326 expired. Closing PR. |
|
Master branch: 08063b4 |
|
Master branch: 9492450 |
|
Master branch: a8fee96 |
|
Master branch: 46e9244 |
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 4, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 5, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf-rc bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 8, 2024
There are so many "ENOTSUPP" (-524) errors when running BPF selftests on a Loongarch platform since lacking BPF trampoline on Loongarch: ''' test_d_path_basic:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'prog_stat': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_d_path_basic:FAIL:setup attach failed: -524 #77/1 d_path/basic:FAIL #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:FAIL ... ... test_module_attach:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:set_attach_target_explicit 0 nsec test_module_attach:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'handle_fentry': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_module_attach:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attach failed: -524 #167 module_attach:FAIL ... ... ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_open 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_cons_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:rw_extend 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_cons_pos_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_rw 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_prod_pos_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_one_err 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_two 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:wr_data_page_all 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_prod_pos 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:write_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:exec_protect 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ro_remap 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:unmap_ro 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:PASS:ringbuf_create 0 nsec ringbuf_subtest:FAIL:skel_attach skeleton attachment failed: -1 #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:FAIL #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:FAIL ... ... test_test_bprm_opts:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to attach: unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'secure_exec': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_bprm_opts:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #382 test_bprm_opts:FAIL ... ... test_test_ima:PASS:skel_load 0 nsec test_test_ima:PASS:ringbuf 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'bprm_committed_creds': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_test_ima:FAIL:attach attach failed: -524 #384 test_ima:FAIL ... ... test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec test_trace_ext:PASS:setup 0 nsec libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to attach: \ unknown error (-524) libbpf: prog 'test_pkt_md_access_new': failed to auto-attach: -524 test_trace_ext:FAIL:setup freplace/test_pkt_md_access attach failed: -524 #397 trace_ext:FAIL ''' This patch uses ASSERT_OK() instead of CHECK() to skip these "ENOTSUPP" errors. With this change, the new output of these selftests look like: ''' #77/1 d_path/basic:SKIP #77/2 d_path/check_rdonly_mem:OK #77/3 d_path/check_alloc_mem:OK #77 d_path:OK (SKIP: 1/3) ... ... #167 module_attach:SKIP ... ... #277/1 ringbuf/ringbuf:SKIP #277/2 ringbuf/ringbuf_n:SKIP #277/3 ringbuf/ringbuf_map_key:SKIP #277 ringbuf:SKIP ... ... #382 test_bprm_opts:SKIP ... ... #384 test_ima:SKIP ... ... #397 trace_ext:SKIP ''' Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang <tanggeliang@kylinos.cn>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Pull request for series with
subject: Make 2-byte access to bpf_sk_lookup->remote_port endian-agnostic
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/list/?series=624326