On 10/24/24 7:56 PM, Zijian Zhang wrote:
On 10/24/24 7:43 AM, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 10/24/24 6:06 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
zijianzhang@ wrote:
From: Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Several fixes to test_sockmap and added push/pop logic for msg_verify_data
Before the fixes, some of the tests in test_sockmap are problematic,
resulting in pseudo-correct result.
1. txmsg_pass is not set in some tests, as a result, no eBPF program is
attached to the sockmap.
2. In SENDPAGE, a wrong iov_length in test_send_large may result in some
test skippings and failures.
3. The calculation of total_bytes in msg_loop_rx is wrong, which may cause
msg_loop_rx end early and skip some data tests.
Besides, for msg_verify_data, I added push/pop checking logic to function
msg_verify_data and added more tests for different cases.
Thanks! Yep I think push/pop are not widely used anywhere unfortunately.
There are some interesting uses for push/pop to add/edit headers, but
I've not gotten there yet clearly.
Thanks for the reviewing :)
After that, I found that there are some bugs in bpf_msg_push_data,
bpf_msg_pop_data and sk_msg_reset_curr, and fix them. I guess the reason
why they have not been exposed is that because of the above problems, they
will not be triggered.
Good. I'll review these quickly tonight/tomorrow and run some testing.
We don't currently have any longer running tests with push/pop.
Looks like the series needs a rebase to latest bpf tree.
Thanks,
Daniel
This series depends on my previous fixes to test_sockmap("Two fixes for
test_sockmap"), and they were merged to bpf/bpf-next.git (net branch) a
week ago. Shall I wait for merging of them to the latest bpf, and then
rebase?
Then this series also needs to be based against bpf-next, net branch (along
with PATCH bpf-next in $subj) so that the CI can pick it up.
Thanks,
Daniel
