Re: [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] selftests/bpf: add tests for TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS

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

 



On 8/2/24 8:29 AM, Alan Maguire wrote:
Add tests to set/get TCP sockopt TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS via
bpf_setsockopt() and also add a cgroup/setsockopt program that
catches setsockopt() for this option and uses bpf_setsockopt()
to set it.  The latter allows us to support modifying sockops
cb flags on a per-socket basis via setsockopt() without adding
support into core setsockopt() itself.

Signed-off-by: Alan Maguire <alan.maguire@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c | 11 ++++++
  .../selftests/bpf/progs/setget_sockopt.c      | 37 +++++++++++++++++--
  2 files changed, 45 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c
index 7d4a9b3d3722..b9c54217a489 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c
@@ -42,6 +42,7 @@ static int create_netns(void)
  static void test_tcp(int family)
  {
  	struct setget_sockopt__bss *bss = skel->bss;
+	int cb_flags = BPF_SOCK_OPS_STATE_CB_FLAG | BPF_SOCK_OPS_RTO_CB_FLAG;
  	int sfd, cfd;
memset(bss, 0, sizeof(*bss));
@@ -56,6 +57,9 @@ static void test_tcp(int family)
  		close(sfd);
  		return;
  	}
+	ASSERT_EQ(setsockopt(sfd, SOL_TCP, TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS,
+			     &cb_flags, sizeof(cb_flags)),
+		  0, "setsockopt cb_flags");

The sfd here is the listen fd. The setsockopt here is after the connection is established and the connection won't be affected by this setsockopt...

I don't think this test belongs to test_tcp() here, more on this below...

  	close(sfd);
  	close(cfd);
@@ -65,6 +69,8 @@ static void test_tcp(int family)
  	ASSERT_EQ(bss->nr_passive, 1, "nr_passive");
  	ASSERT_EQ(bss->nr_socket_post_create, 2, "nr_socket_post_create");
  	ASSERT_EQ(bss->nr_binddev, 2, "nr_bind");
+	ASSERT_GE(bss->nr_state, 1, "nr_state");
+	ASSERT_EQ(bss->nr_setsockopt, 1, "nr_setsockopt");
  }
static void test_udp(int family)
@@ -185,6 +191,11 @@ void test_setget_sockopt(void)
  	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel->links.socket_post_create, "attach_cgroup"))
  		goto done;
+ skel->links.tcp_setsockopt =
+		bpf_program__attach_cgroup(skel->progs.tcp_setsockopt, cg_fd);
+	if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel->links.tcp_setsockopt, "attach_setsockopt"))
+		goto done;
+
  	test_tcp(AF_INET6);
  	test_tcp(AF_INET);
  	test_udp(AF_INET6);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/setget_sockopt.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/setget_sockopt.c
index 60518aed1ffc..920af9e21e84 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/setget_sockopt.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/setget_sockopt.c
@@ -20,6 +20,8 @@ int nr_connect;
  int nr_binddev;
  int nr_socket_post_create;
  int nr_fin_wait1;
+int nr_state;
+int nr_setsockopt;
struct sockopt_test {
  	int opt;
@@ -59,6 +61,8 @@ static const struct sockopt_test sol_tcp_tests[] = {
  	{ .opt = TCP_THIN_LINEAR_TIMEOUTS, .flip = 1, },
  	{ .opt = TCP_USER_TIMEOUT, .new = 123400, .expected = 123400, },
  	{ .opt = TCP_NOTSENT_LOWAT, .new = 1314, .expected = 1314, },
+	{ .opt = TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS, .new = BPF_SOCK_OPS_ALL_CB_FLAGS,
+	  .expected = BPF_SOCK_OPS_ALL_CB_FLAGS, .restore = BPF_SOCK_OPS_STATE_CB_FLAG, },
  	{ .opt = 0, },
  };
@@ -124,6 +128,7 @@ static int bpf_test_sockopt_int(void *ctx, struct sock *sk, if (bpf_setsockopt(ctx, level, opt, &new, sizeof(new)))
  		return 1;
+
  	if (bpf_getsockopt(ctx, level, opt, &tmp, sizeof(tmp)) ||
  	    tmp != expected)
  		return 1;
@@ -384,11 +389,14 @@ int skops_sockopt(struct bpf_sock_ops *skops)
  		nr_passive += !(bpf_test_sockopt(skops, sk) ||
  				test_tcp_maxseg(skops, sk) ||
  				test_tcp_saved_syn(skops, sk));
-		bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set(skops,
-					  skops->bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags |
-					  BPF_SOCK_OPS_STATE_CB_FLAG);
+
+		/* no need to set sockops cb flags here as sockopt
+		 * tests and user-space originated setsockopt() will
+		 * set flags to include BPF_SOCK_OPS_STATE_CB.
+		 */

I don't think the "user-space originated..." comment is accruate here. The user-space originated setsockopt() from the above test_tcp() won't affect the passively established sk here. This took me a while to digest...

iiuc, the removed bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set() for the passive connection is now implicitly done (and hidden) in the newly added sol_tcp_tests[].restore.

How about keeping the explicit bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set() and removing the ".restore".

The existing bpf_sock_ops_cb_flags_set() can be changed to bpf_setsockopt(TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS) if it helps to test if it is effective.

  		break;
  	case BPF_SOCK_OPS_STATE_CB:
+		nr_state++;

How about removing the nr_state addition and adding a SEC("cgroup/getsockopt") bpf prog to test the getsockopt(TCP_BPF_SOCK_OPS_CB_FLAGS).

Create another test_nonstandard_opt() in prog_tests/setget_sockopt.c and separate it from the existing test_{tcp, udp...} which is mainly exercising set/getsockopt(sol_*_tests[]) on different hooks (right now it has lsm_cgroup/socket_post_create and sockops). It doesn't fit testing the user syscall set/getsockopt on the nonstandard_opt.




[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