Re: [PATCH v7 bpf-next 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add selftest for bits iter

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, May 5, 2024 at 8:35 PM Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Add test cases for the bits iter:
> - positive case
>   - bit mask smaller than 8 bytes
>   - a typical case of having 8-byte bit mask
>   - another typical case where bit mask is > 8 bytes
>   - the index of set bit
>
> - nagative cases
>   - bpf_iter_bits_destroy() is required after calling
>     bpf_iter_bits_new()
>   - bpf_iter_bits_destroy() can only destroy an initialized iter
>   - bpf_iter_bits_next() must use an initialized iter
>
> Signed-off-by: Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c       |   2 +
>  .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bits_iter.c  | 160 ++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 162 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bits_iter.c
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> index c4f9f306646e..7e04ecaaa20a 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/verifier.c
> @@ -84,6 +84,7 @@
>  #include "verifier_xadd.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_xdp.skel.h"
>  #include "verifier_xdp_direct_packet_access.skel.h"
> +#include "verifier_bits_iter.skel.h"
>
>  #define MAX_ENTRIES 11
>
> @@ -198,6 +199,7 @@ void test_verifier_var_off(void)              { RUN(verifier_var_off); }
>  void test_verifier_xadd(void)                 { RUN(verifier_xadd); }
>  void test_verifier_xdp(void)                  { RUN(verifier_xdp); }
>  void test_verifier_xdp_direct_packet_access(void) { RUN(verifier_xdp_direct_packet_access); }
> +void test_verifier_bits_iter(void) { RUN(verifier_bits_iter); }
>
>  static int init_test_val_map(struct bpf_object *obj, char *map_name)
>  {
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bits_iter.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bits_iter.c
> new file mode 100644
> index 000000000000..2f7b62b25638
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bits_iter.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,160 @@
> +// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only
> +/* Copyright (c) 2024 Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@xxxxxxxxx> */
> +
> +#include "vmlinux.h"
> +#include <bpf/bpf_helpers.h>
> +#include <bpf/bpf_tracing.h>
> +
> +#include "bpf_misc.h"
> +#include "task_kfunc_common.h"
> +
> +char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL";
> +
> +int bpf_iter_bits_new(struct bpf_iter_bits *it, const void *unsafe_ptr__ign,
> +                     u32 nr_bits) __ksym __weak;
> +int *bpf_iter_bits_next(struct bpf_iter_bits *it) __ksym __weak;
> +void bpf_iter_bits_destroy(struct bpf_iter_bits *it) __ksym __weak;
> +
> +SEC("iter.s/cgroup")
> +__description("bits iter without destroy")
> +__failure __msg("Unreleased reference")
> +int BPF_PROG(no_destroy, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta, struct cgroup *cgrp)
> +{
> +       struct bpf_iter_bits it;
> +       struct task_struct *p;
> +
> +       p = bpf_task_from_pid(1);
> +       if (!p)
> +               return 1;
> +
> +       bpf_iter_bits_new(&it, p->cpus_ptr, 8192);
> +
> +       bpf_iter_bits_next(&it);
> +       bpf_task_release(p);
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("iter/cgroup")
> +__description("bits iter with uninitialized iter in ->next()")
> +__failure __msg("expected an initialized iter_bits as arg #1")
> +int BPF_PROG(next_uninit, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta, struct cgroup *cgrp)
> +{
> +       struct bpf_iter_bits *it = NULL;
> +
> +       bpf_iter_bits_next(it);
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("iter/cgroup")
> +__description("bits iter with uninitialized iter in ->destroy()")
> +__failure __msg("expected an initialized iter_bits as arg #1")
> +int BPF_PROG(destroy_uninit, struct bpf_iter_meta *meta, struct cgroup *cgrp)
> +{
> +       struct bpf_iter_bits it = {};
> +
> +       bpf_iter_bits_destroy(&it);
> +       return 0;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bits copy 32")
> +__success __retval(10)
> +int bits_copy32(void)
> +{
> +       /* 21 bits:             --------------------- */
> +       u32 data = 0b11111101111101111100001000100101U;

if you define this bit mask as an array of bytes, then you won't have
to handle big-endian in the tests at all


> +       int nr = 0, offset = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_s390)
> +       offset = sizeof(u32) - (21 + 7) / 8;
> +#endif
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, ((char *)&data) + offset, 21)
> +               nr++;
> +       return nr;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bits copy 64")
> +__success __retval(18)
> +int bits_copy64(void)
> +{
> +       /* 34 bits:         ~-------- */
> +       u64 data = 0xffffefdf0f0f0f0fUL;
> +       int nr = 0, offset = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +#if defined(__TARGET_ARCH_s390)
> +       offset = sizeof(u64) - (34 + 7) / 8;
> +#endif
> +
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, ((char *)&data) + offset, 34)

see above about byte array, but if we define different (not as byte
array but long[]), it would be cleaner to have

#if __BYTE_ORDER__ == __ORDER_BIG_ENDIAN__
u64 data = 0x......UL;
#else
u64 data = 0x......UL;
#endif

wherer we'd hard-code bit masks in proper endianness in one place and
then just do a clean `bpf_for_each(bits, bit, &data, <len>) {}` calls

> +               nr++;
> +       return nr;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bits memalloc long-aligned")
> +__success __retval(32) /* 16 * 2 */
> +int bits_memalloc(void)
> +{
> +       char data[16];
> +       int nr = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +       __builtin_memset(&data, 0x48, sizeof(data));
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, &data, sizeof(data) * 8)
> +               nr++;
> +       return nr;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bits memalloc non-long-aligned")
> +__success __retval(85) /* 17 * 5*/
> +int bits_memalloc_non_aligned(void)
> +{
> +       char data[17];
> +       int nr = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +       __builtin_memset(&data, 0x1f, sizeof(data));
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, &data, sizeof(data) * 8)
> +               nr++;
> +       return nr;
> +}
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bits memalloc non-aligned-bits")
> +__success __retval(27) /* 8 * 3 + 3 */
> +int bits_memalloc_non_aligned_bits(void)
> +{
> +       char data[16];
> +       int nr = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +       __builtin_memset(&data, 0x31, sizeof(data));
> +       /* Different with all other bytes */
> +       data[8] = 0xf7;
> +
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, &data,  68)
> +               nr++;
> +       return nr;
> +}
> +
> +
> +SEC("syscall")
> +__description("bit index")
> +__success __retval(8)
> +int bit_index(void)
> +{
> +       u64 data = 0x100;
> +       int bit_idx = 0;
> +       int *bit;
> +
> +       bpf_for_each(bits, bit, &data, 64) {
> +               if (*bit == 0)
> +                       continue;
> +               bit_idx = *bit;
> +       }
> +       return bit_idx;
> +}
> --
> 2.30.1 (Apple Git-130)
>





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux