6.12-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 862087c3d36219ed44569666eb263efc97f00c9a ]
Add push/pop checking for msg_verify_data in test_sockmap, except for
pop/push with cork tests, in these tests the logic will be different.
1. With corking, pop/push might not be invoked in each sendmsg, it makes
the layout of the received data difficult
2. It makes it hard to calculate the total_bytes in the recvmsg
Temporarily skip the data integrity test for these cases now, added a TODO
Fixes: ee9b352ce465 ("selftests/bpf: Fix msg_verify_data in test_sockmap")
Signed-off-by: Zijian Zhang <zijianzhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20241106222520.527076-5-zijianzhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@xxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 106 ++++++++++++++++++++-
1 file changed, 101 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c
index 5f4558f1f0049..61a747afcd05f 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c
@@ -88,6 +88,10 @@ int ktls;
int peek_flag;
int skb_use_parser;
int txmsg_omit_skb_parser;
+int verify_push_start;
+int verify_push_len;
+int verify_pop_start;
+int verify_pop_len;
static const struct option long_options[] = {
{"help", no_argument, NULL, 'h' },
@@ -514,12 +518,41 @@ static int msg_alloc_iov(struct msghdr *msg,
return -ENOMEM;
}
-/* TODO: Add verification logic for push, pull and pop data */
+/* In push or pop test, we need to do some calculations for msg_verify_data */
+static void msg_verify_date_prep(void)
+{
+ int push_range_end = txmsg_start_push + txmsg_end_push - 1;
+ int pop_range_end = txmsg_start_pop + txmsg_pop - 1;
+
+ if (txmsg_end_push && txmsg_pop &&
+ txmsg_start_push <= pop_range_end && txmsg_start_pop <= push_range_end) {
+ /* The push range and the pop range overlap */
+ int overlap_len;
+
+ verify_push_start = txmsg_start_push;
+ verify_pop_start = txmsg_start_pop;
+ if (txmsg_start_push < txmsg_start_pop)
+ overlap_len = min(push_range_end - txmsg_start_pop + 1, txmsg_pop);
+ else
+ overlap_len = min(pop_range_end - txmsg_start_push + 1, txmsg_end_push);
+ verify_push_len = max(txmsg_end_push - overlap_len, 0);
+ verify_pop_len = max(txmsg_pop - overlap_len, 0);
+ } else {
+ /* Otherwise */
+ verify_push_start = txmsg_start_push;
+ verify_pop_start = txmsg_start_pop;
+ verify_push_len = txmsg_end_push;
+ verify_pop_len = txmsg_pop;
+ }
+}
+
static int msg_verify_data(struct msghdr *msg, int size, int chunk_sz,
- unsigned char *k_p, int *bytes_cnt_p)
+ unsigned char *k_p, int *bytes_cnt_p,
+ int *check_cnt_p, int *push_p)
{
- int i, j, bytes_cnt = *bytes_cnt_p;
+ int bytes_cnt = *bytes_cnt_p, check_cnt = *check_cnt_p, push = *push_p;
unsigned char k = *k_p;
+ int i, j;
for (i = 0, j = 0; i < msg->msg_iovlen && size; i++, j = 0) {
unsigned char *d = msg->msg_iov[i].iov_base;
@@ -538,6 +571,37 @@ static int msg_verify_data(struct msghdr *msg, int size, int chunk_sz,
}
for (; j < msg->msg_iov[i].iov_len && size; j++) {
+ if (push > 0 &&
+ check_cnt == verify_push_start + verify_push_len - push) {
+ int skipped;
+revisit_push:
+ skipped = push;
+ if (j + push >= msg->msg_iov[i].iov_len)
+ skipped = msg->msg_iov[i].iov_len - j;
+ push -= skipped;
+ size -= skipped;
+ j += skipped - 1;
+ check_cnt += skipped;
+ continue;
+ }
+
+ if (verify_pop_len > 0 && check_cnt == verify_pop_start) {
+ bytes_cnt += verify_pop_len;
+ check_cnt += verify_pop_len;
+ k += verify_pop_len;
+
+ if (bytes_cnt == chunk_sz) {
+ k = 0;
+ bytes_cnt = 0;
+ check_cnt = 0;
+ push = verify_push_len;
+ }
+
+ if (push > 0 &&
+ check_cnt == verify_push_start + verify_push_len - push)
+ goto revisit_push;
+ }
+
if (d[j] != k++) {
fprintf(stderr,
"detected data corruption @iov[%i]:%i %02x != %02x, %02x ?= %02x\n",
@@ -545,15 +609,20 @@ static int msg_verify_data(struct msghdr *msg, int size, int chunk_sz,
return -EDATAINTEGRITY;
}
bytes_cnt++;
+ check_cnt++;
if (bytes_cnt == chunk_sz) {
k = 0;
bytes_cnt = 0;
+ check_cnt = 0;
+ push = verify_push_len;
}
size--;
}
}
*k_p = k;
*bytes_cnt_p = bytes_cnt;
+ *check_cnt_p = check_cnt;
+ *push_p = push;
return 0;
}
@@ -612,6 +681,8 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt,
struct timeval timeout;
unsigned char k = 0;
int bytes_cnt = 0;
+ int check_cnt = 0;
+ int push = 0;
fd_set w;
fcntl(fd, fd_flags);
@@ -637,6 +708,10 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt,
}
total_bytes += txmsg_push_total;
total_bytes -= txmsg_pop_total;
+ if (data) {
+ msg_verify_date_prep();
+ push = verify_push_len;
+ }
err = clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, &s->start);
if (err < 0)
perror("recv start time");
@@ -712,7 +787,8 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt,
iov_length :
iov_length * iov_count;
- errno = msg_verify_data(&msg, recv, chunk_sz, &k, &bytes_cnt);
+ errno = msg_verify_data(&msg, recv, chunk_sz, &k, &bytes_cnt,
+ &check_cnt, &push);
if (errno) {
perror("data verify msg failed");
goto out_errno;
@@ -722,7 +798,9 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt,
recvp,
chunk_sz,
&k,
- &bytes_cnt);
+ &bytes_cnt,
+ &check_cnt,
+ &push);
if (errno) {
perror("data verify msg_peek failed");
goto out_errno;
@@ -1636,6 +1714,8 @@ static void test_txmsg_pull(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
static void test_txmsg_pop(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
{
+ bool data = opt->data_test;
+
/* Test basic pop */
txmsg_pass = 1;
txmsg_start_pop = 1;
@@ -1654,6 +1734,12 @@ static void test_txmsg_pop(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
txmsg_pop = 2;
test_send_many(opt, cgrp);
+ /* TODO: Test for pop + cork should be different,
+ * - It makes the layout of the received data difficult
+ * - It makes it hard to calculate the total_bytes in the recvmsg
+ * Temporarily skip the data integrity test for this case now.
+ */
+ opt->data_test = false;
/* Test pop + cork */
txmsg_redir = 0;
txmsg_cork = 512;
@@ -1667,10 +1753,13 @@ static void test_txmsg_pop(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
txmsg_start_pop = 1;
txmsg_pop = 2;
test_send_many(opt, cgrp);
+ opt->data_test = data;
}
static void test_txmsg_push(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
{
+ bool data = opt->data_test;
+
/* Test basic push */
txmsg_pass = 1;
txmsg_start_push = 1;
@@ -1689,12 +1778,19 @@ static void test_txmsg_push(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
txmsg_end_push = 2;
test_send_many(opt, cgrp);
+ /* TODO: Test for push + cork should be different,
+ * - It makes the layout of the received data difficult
+ * - It makes it hard to calculate the total_bytes in the recvmsg
+ * Temporarily skip the data integrity test for this case now.
+ */
+ opt->data_test = false;
/* Test push + cork */
txmsg_redir = 0;
txmsg_cork = 512;
txmsg_start_push = 1;
txmsg_end_push = 2;
test_send_many(opt, cgrp);
+ opt->data_test = data;
}
static void test_txmsg_push_pop(int cgrp, struct sockmap_options *opt)
--
2.43.0
