Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> [Mon, 2020-05-18 08:35 -0700]:
> Extend the existing connect_force_port test to assert get{peer,sock}name programs
> as well. The workflow for e.g. IPv4 is as follows: i) server binds to concrete
> port, ii) client calls getsockname() on server fd which exposes 1.2.3.4:60000 to
> client, iii) client connects to service address 1.2.3.4:60000 binds to concrete
> local address (127.0.0.1:22222) and remaps service address to a concrete backend
> address (127.0.0.1:60123), iv) client then calls getsockname() on its own fd to
> verify local address (127.0.0.1:22222) and getpeername() on its own fd which then
> publishes service address (1.2.3.4:60000) instead of actual backend. Same workflow
> is done for IPv6 just with different address/port tuples.
>
> # ./test_progs -t connect_force_port
> #14 connect_force_port:OK
> Summary: 1/0 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Andrey Ignatov <rdna@xxxxxx>
> ---
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/network_helpers.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/network_helpers.c
> @@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
> #include <string.h>
> #include <unistd.h>
>
> +#include <arpa/inet.h>
> +
> #include <sys/epoll.h>
>
> #include <linux/err.h>
> @@ -35,7 +37,7 @@ struct ipv6_packet pkt_v6 = {
> .tcp.doff = 5,
> };
>
> -int start_server(int family, int type)
> +int start_server_with_port(int family, int type, int port)
Nit: IMO it's worth to start using __u16 for ports in new places,
especially since this network helper can be adopted by many tests in the
future. I know 4-byte int-s are used for ports even in UAPI, but IMO it
just adds confusion and complicates implementation in both kernel and
user BPF programs.
--
Andrey Ignatov
