On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 12:54:43AM +0400, Dmitrii Banshchikov wrote: > On Mon, Aug 30, 2021 at 12:45:45PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 10:36:07PM +0400, Dmitrii Banshchikov wrote: > > > /* > > > - * # Generated by iptables-save v1.8.2 on Sat May 8 05:22:41 2021 > > > + * Generated by iptables-save v1.8.2 on Sat May 8 05:22:41 2021 > > > * *filter > > ... > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.32.0.0/11 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.144.0.0/12 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.160.0.0/12 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.0.0.0/12 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.248.0.0/24 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.232.0.0/16 -j FROMDC > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.1.146.131/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 161 -j ACCEPT > > > - * -A LOCAL -s 10.149.118.14/32 -p udp -m udp --dport 161 -j ACCEPT > > > - * -A LOCAL -p icmp -j ACCEPT > > > + * :INPUT ACCEPT [0:0] > > > + * :FORWARD ACCEPT [0:0] > > > + * :OUTPUT ACCEPT [0:0] > > > + * -A INPUT -s 1.1.1.1/32 -d 2.2.2.2/32 -j DROP > > > + * -A INPUT -s 2.2.0.0/16 -d 3.0.0.0/8 -j DROP > > > + * -A INPUT -p udp -m udp --sport 100 --dport 500 -j DROP > > > * COMMIT > > > */ > > > > Patch 10 adds this test, but then patch 12 removes most of it? > > Keep both? > > Sorry, I missed it. > I decided that the large blob looks really ugly and switched to > the smaller one and forgot to cleanup the patchset. > > > > > Also hit this on my system with older glibc: > > > > ../net/bpfilter/codegen.c: In function ‘codegen_push_subprog’: > > ../net/bpfilter/codegen.c:67:4: warning: implicit declaration of function ‘reallocarray’ [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] > > 67 | reallocarray(codegen->subprogs, subprogs_max, sizeof(codegen->subprogs[0])); > > | ^~~~~~~~~~~~ > > ../net/bpfilter/codegen.c:66:12: warning: assignment to ‘struct codegen_subprog_desc **’ from ‘int’ makes pointer from integer without a cast [-Wint-conversion] > > 66 | subprogs = > > | ^ > > > > In libbpf we have libbpf_reallocarray() for this reason. > > > > Could you provide an example of generated bpf program? > > And maybe add Documentation/bpf/bpfilter_design.rst ? > > I will add documentation in the next iteration when > bpf_map_for_each() subprog will be introduced. > > > > > The tests don't build for me: > > $ cd selftests/bpf/bpfilter; make > > make: *** No rule to make target '-lelf', needed by '.../selftests/bpf/bpfilter/test_match'. Stop. > > libelf was added because libbpf depends on it. > Are you able to build libbpf? make proceeds to build libbpf just fine, but then it stops with above message. I manually removed -lelf from Makefile. Then run make to see it fail linking and then manually copy pasted gcc command to build it with additional -lelf command line. fwiw make -v GNU Make 4.2.1 > > > > The unit tests are great, btw. test_codegen is not end-to-end, right? > > Could you add a full test with iptable command line? > > or netns support is a prerequisite for it? > > Yeah, as net namespaces aren't supported using iptables binary > will modify the root namespace. That is the reason why codegen > tests aren't implemented in the end-to-end fashion and rules are > represented by blobs. I think when ifindex is no longer hardcoded the netns support doesn't have to be gating. The generic xdp attached to veth in netns should work to do end-to-end test. bpftiler would need to do a bit of magic to figure out the right ifindex. Or we can extend kernel with ifindex-less generic XDP.
