- Linux-kselftest-mirror - lists.linaro.org

[PATCH AUTOSEL 5.2 024/249] selftests/bpf: adjust verifier scale test

by Sasha Levin

From: Alexei Starovoitov <ast(a)kernel.org> [ Upstream commit 7c0c6095d48dcd0e67c917aa73cdbb2715aafc36 ] Adjust scale tests to check for new jmp sequence limit. BPF_JGT had to be changed to BPF_JEQ because the verifier was too smart. It tracked the known safe range of R0 values and pruned the search earlier before hitting exact 8192 limit. bpf_semi_rand_get() was too (un)?lucky. k = 0; was missing in bpf_fill_scale2. It was testing a bit shorter sequence of jumps than intended. Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast(a)kernel.org> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin(a)fb.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel(a)iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal(a)kernel.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 31 +++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c index 288cb740e005..6438d4dc8ae1 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c @@ -207,33 +207,35 @@ static void bpf_fill_rand_ld_dw(struct bpf_test *self) self->retval = (uint32_t)res; } -/* test the sequence of 1k jumps */ +#define MAX_JMP_SEQ 8192 + +/* test the sequence of 8k jumps */ static void bpf_fill_scale1(struct bpf_test *self) { struct bpf_insn *insn = self->fill_insns; int i = 0, k = 0; insn[i++] = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1); - /* test to check that the sequence of 1024 jumps is acceptable */ - while (k++ < 1024) { + /* test to check that the long sequence of jumps is acceptable */ + while (k++ < MAX_JMP_SEQ) { insn[i++] = BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32); - insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, bpf_semi_rand_get(), 2); + insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, bpf_semi_rand_get(), 2); insn[i++] = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10); insn[i++] = BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, -8 * (k % 64 + 1)); } - /* every jump adds 1024 steps to insn_processed, so to stay exactly - * within 1m limit add MAX_TEST_INSNS - 1025 MOVs and 1 EXIT + /* every jump adds 1 step to insn_processed, so to stay exactly + * within 1m limit add MAX_TEST_INSNS - MAX_JMP_SEQ - 1 MOVs and 1 EXIT */ - while (i < MAX_TEST_INSNS - 1025) + while (i < MAX_TEST_INSNS - MAX_JMP_SEQ - 1) insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_0, 42); insn[i] = BPF_EXIT_INSN(); self->prog_len = i + 1; self->retval = 42; } -/* test the sequence of 1k jumps in inner most function (function depth 8)*/ +/* test the sequence of 8k jumps in inner most function (function depth 8)*/ static void bpf_fill_scale2(struct bpf_test *self) { struct bpf_insn *insn = self->fill_insns; @@ -245,19 +247,20 @@ static void bpf_fill_scale2(struct bpf_test *self) insn[i++] = BPF_EXIT_INSN(); } insn[i++] = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_6, BPF_REG_1); - /* test to check that the sequence of 1024 jumps is acceptable */ - while (k++ < 1024) { + /* test to check that the long sequence of jumps is acceptable */ + k = 0; + while (k++ < MAX_JMP_SEQ) { insn[i++] = BPF_RAW_INSN(BPF_JMP | BPF_CALL, 0, 0, 0, BPF_FUNC_get_prandom_u32); - insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_0, bpf_semi_rand_get(), 2); + insn[i++] = BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JEQ, BPF_REG_0, bpf_semi_rand_get(), 2); insn[i++] = BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10); insn[i++] = BPF_STX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_6, -8 * (k % (64 - 4 * FUNC_NEST) + 1)); } - /* every jump adds 1024 steps to insn_processed, so to stay exactly - * within 1m limit add MAX_TEST_INSNS - 1025 MOVs and 1 EXIT + /* every jump adds 1 step to insn_processed, so to stay exactly + * within 1m limit add MAX_TEST_INSNS - MAX_JMP_SEQ - 1 MOVs and 1 EXIT */ - while (i < MAX_TEST_INSNS - 1025) + while (i < MAX_TEST_INSNS - MAX_JMP_SEQ - 1) insn[i++] = BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, BPF_REG_0, 42); insn[i] = BPF_EXIT_INSN(); self->prog_len = i + 1; -- 2.20.1

6 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

[GIT PULL] Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1

by Shuah Khan

Hi Linus, Please pull the following Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1. This Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1 consists of build failure fixes and minor code cleaning patch to remove duplicate headers. diff is attached. thanks, -- Shuah ---------------------------------------------------------------- The following changes since commit 4b972a01a7da614b4796475f933094751a295a2f: Linux 5.2-rc6 (2019-06-22 16:01:36 -0700) are available in the Git repository at: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/shuah/linux-kselftest tags/linux-kselftest-5.3-rc1 for you to fetch changes up to ee8a84c60bcc1f1615bd9cb3edfe501e26cdc85b: rseq/selftests: Fix Thumb mode build failure on arm32 (2019-07-08 13:00:41 -0600) ---------------------------------------------------------------- linux-kselftest-5.3-rc1 This Kselftest update for Linux 5.3-rc1 consists of build failure fixes and minor code cleaning patch to remove duplicate headers. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mathieu Desnoyers (1): rseq/selftests: Fix Thumb mode build failure on arm32 Naresh Kamboju (1): selftests: dma-buf: Adding kernel config fragment CONFIG_UDMABUF=y Shuah Khan (1): selftests: timestamping: Fix SIOCGSTAMP undeclared build failure YueHaibing (1): kselftests: cgroup: remove duplicated include from test_freezer.c tools/testing/selftests/cgroup/test_freezer.c | 1 - tools/testing/selftests/drivers/dma-buf/config | 1 + .../networking/timestamping/timestamping.c | 9 +--- tools/testing/selftests/rseq/rseq-arm.h | 61 ++++++++++++---------- 4 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 37 deletions(-) create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/drivers/dma-buf/config ----------------------------------------------------------------

6 years, 3 months

2
1
0 0

[RFC PATCH] selftests/livepatch: only consider supported arches

by Joe Lawrence

Only run the livepatching self-tests on x86_64 and ppc64le arches. Reported-by: Jiri Benc <jbenc(a)redhat.com> Signed-off-by: Joe Lawrence <joe.lawrence(a)redhat.com> --- tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/Makefile | 13 +++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/Makefile index fd405402c3ff..9842fb473d42 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/livepatch/Makefile @@ -1,5 +1,16 @@ # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 +ARCH ?= $(shell uname -m 2>/dev/null || echo not) + +ifeq ($(ARCH),x86_64) +livepatch_supported := 1 +endif +ifeq ($(ARCH),ppc64le) +livepatch_supported := 1 +endif + +ifdef livepatch_supported + TEST_PROGS_EXTENDED := functions.sh TEST_PROGS := \ test-livepatch.sh \ @@ -7,3 +18,5 @@ TEST_PROGS := \ test-shadow-vars.sh include ../lib.mk + +endif -- 2.21.0

6 years, 3 months

2
4
0 0

[PATCH 0/2] Fold checksum at the end of bpf_csum_diff and fix

by Paolo Pisati

From: Paolo Pisati <paolo.pisati(a)canonical.com> After applying patch 0001, all checksum implementations i could test (x86-64, arm64 and arm), now agree on the return value. Patch 0002 fix the expected return value for test #13: i did the calculation manually, and it correspond. Unfortunately, after applying patch 0001, other test cases now fail in test_verifier: $ sudo ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier ... #417/p helper access to variable memory: size = 0 allowed on NULL (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 #419/p helper access to variable memory: size = 0 allowed on != NULL stack pointer (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 #423/p helper access to variable memory: size possible = 0 allowed on != NULL packet pointer (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 ... Summary: 1500 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 3 FAILED And there are probably other fallouts in other selftests - someone familiar should take a look before applying these patches. Paolo Pisati (2): bpf: bpf_csum_diff: fold the checksum before returning the value bpf, selftest: fix checksum value for test #13 net/core/filter.c | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1

6 years, 3 months

3
4
0 0

[PATCH 0/2] [RESEND] Fold checksum at the end of bpf_csum_diff and fix

by Paolo Pisati

From: Paolo Pisati <paolo.pisati(a)canonical.com> After applying patch 0001, all checksum implementations i could test (x86-64, arm64 and arm), now agree on the return value. Patch 0002 fix the expected return value for test #13: i did the calculation manually, and it correspond. Unfortunately, after applying patch 0001, other test cases now fail in test_verifier: $ sudo ./tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier ... #417/p helper access to variable memory: size = 0 allowed on NULL (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 #419/p helper access to variable memory: size = 0 allowed on != NULL stack pointer (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 #423/p helper access to variable memory: size possible = 0 allowed on != NULL packet pointer (ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL) FAIL retval 65535 != 0 ... Summary: 1500 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 3 FAILED And there are probably other fallouts in other selftests - someone familiar should take a look before applying these patches. Paolo Pisati (2): bpf: bpf_csum_diff: fold the checksum before returning the value bpf, selftest: fix checksum value for test #13 net/core/filter.c | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/array_access.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) -- 2.17.1

6 years, 3 months

2
3
0 0

[PATCH] vsyscall: use __iter_div_u64_rem()

by Arnd Bergmann

On 32-bit x86 when building with clang-9, the loop gets turned back into an inefficient division that causes a link error: kernel/time/vsyscall.o: In function `update_vsyscall': vsyscall.c:(.text+0xe3): undefined reference to `__udivdi3' Use the provided __iter_div_u64_rem() function that is meant to address the same case in other files. Fixes: 44f57d788e7d ("timekeeping: Provide a generic update_vsyscall() implementation") Signed-off-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd(a)arndb.de> --- kernel/time/vsyscall.c | 6 +----- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/time/vsyscall.c b/kernel/time/vsyscall.c index a80893180826..8cf3596a4ce6 100644 --- a/kernel/time/vsyscall.c +++ b/kernel/time/vsyscall.c @@ -104,11 +104,7 @@ void update_vsyscall(struct timekeeper *tk) vdso_ts->sec = tk->xtime_sec + tk->wall_to_monotonic.tv_sec; nsec = tk->tkr_mono.xtime_nsec >> tk->tkr_mono.shift; nsec = nsec + tk->wall_to_monotonic.tv_nsec; - while (nsec >= NSEC_PER_SEC) { - nsec = nsec - NSEC_PER_SEC; - vdso_ts->sec++; - } - vdso_ts->nsec = nsec; + vdso_ts->sec += __iter_div_u64_rem(nsec, NSEC_PER_SEC, &vdso_ts->nsec); if (__arch_use_vsyscall(vdata)) update_vdso_data(vdata, tk); -- 2.20.0

6 years, 3 months

4
6
0 0

[PATCH] selftests: breakpoints: Fix compile error with arun_test()

by Nobuhiro Iwamatsu

By undefined run_test(), compile of breakpoint_test_arm64.c fails. This changes arun_test to run_test. ---- reakpoint_test_arm64.c: In function 'main': breakpoint_test_arm64.c:217:14: warning: implicit declaration of function 'run_test'; did you mean 'arun_test'? [-Wimplicit-function-declaration] result = run_test(size, MIN(size, 8), wr, wp); ^~~~~~~~ arun_test ---- Fixes: 5821ba969511 ("selftests: Add test plan API to kselftest.h and adjust callers") Signed-off-by: Nobuhiro Iwamatsu <iwamatsu(a)nigauri.org> --- tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c b/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c index 58ed5eeab709..ad41ea69001b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/breakpoints/breakpoint_test_arm64.c @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ static bool set_watchpoint(pid_t pid, int size, int wp) return false; } -static bool arun_test(int wr_size, int wp_size, int wr, int wp) +static bool run_test(int wr_size, int wp_size, int wr, int wp) { int status; siginfo_t siginfo; -- 2.20.1

6 years, 3 months

1
0
0 0

[PATCH v7 00/18] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework

by Brendan Higgins

## TL;DR This is a pretty straightforward follow-up to Luis' comments on PATCH v6: There is nothing that changes any functionality or usage. As for our current status, we only need reviews/acks on the following patches: - [PATCH v7 06/18] kbuild: enable building KUnit - Need a review or ack from Masahiro Yamada or Michal Marek - [PATCH v7 08/18] objtool: add kunit_try_catch_throw to the noreturn list - Need a review or ack from Josh Poimboeuf or Peter Zijlstra Other than that, I think we should be good to go. ## Background This patch set proposes KUnit, a lightweight unit testing and mocking framework for the Linux kernel. Unlike Autotest and kselftest, KUnit is a true unit testing framework; it does not require installing the kernel on a test machine or in a VM (however, KUnit still allows you to run tests on test machines or in VMs if you want[1]) and does not require tests to be written in userspace running on a host kernel. Additionally, KUnit is fast: From invocation to completion KUnit can run several dozen tests in about a second. Currently, the entire KUnit test suite for KUnit runs in under a second from the initial invocation (build time excluded). KUnit is heavily inspired by JUnit, Python's unittest.mock, and Googletest/Googlemock for C++. KUnit provides facilities for defining unit test cases, grouping related test cases into test suites, providing common infrastructure for running tests, mocking, spying, and much more. ### What's so special about unit testing? A unit test is supposed to test a single unit of code in isolation, hence the name. There should be no dependencies outside the control of the test; this means no external dependencies, which makes tests orders of magnitudes faster. Likewise, since there are no external dependencies, there are no hoops to jump through to run the tests. Additionally, this makes unit tests deterministic: a failing unit test always indicates a problem. Finally, because unit tests necessarily have finer granularity, they are able to test all code paths easily solving the classic problem of difficulty in exercising error handling code. ### Is KUnit trying to replace other testing frameworks for the kernel? No. Most existing tests for the Linux kernel are end-to-end tests, which have their place. A well tested system has lots of unit tests, a reasonable number of integration tests, and some end-to-end tests. KUnit is just trying to address the unit test space which is currently not being addressed. ### More information on KUnit There is a bunch of documentation near the end of this patch set that describes how to use KUnit and best practices for writing unit tests. For convenience I am hosting the compiled docs here[2]. Additionally for convenience, I have applied these patches to a branch[3]. The repo may be cloned with: git clone https://kunit.googlesource.com/linux This patchset is on the kunit/rfc/v5.2/v7 branch. ## Changes Since Last Version Aside from renaming `struct kunit_module` to `struct kunit_suite`, there isn't really anything in here that changes any functionality: - Rebased on v5.2 - Added Iurii as a maintainer for PROC SYSCTL, as suggested by Luis. - Removed some references to spinlock that I failed to remove in the previous version, as pointed out by Luis. - Cleaned up some comments, as suggested by Luis. [1] https://google.github.io/kunit-docs/third_party/kernel/docs/usage.html#kuni… [2] https://google.github.io/kunit-docs/third_party/kernel/docs/ [3] https://kunit.googlesource.com/linux/+/kunit/rfc/v5.2/v7 -- 2.22.0.410.gd8fdbe21b5-goog

6 years, 3 months

4
24
0 0

[PATCH v8 00/18] kunit: introduce KUnit, the Linux kernel unit testing framework

by Brendan Higgins

## TL;DR This new patch set only contains a very minor change suggested by Masahiro to [PATCH v7 06/18] and is otherwise identical to PATCH v7. Also, with Josh's ack on the preceding patch set, I think we now have all necessary reviews and acks from all interested parties. ## Background This patch set proposes KUnit, a lightweight unit testing and mocking framework for the Linux kernel. Unlike Autotest and kselftest, KUnit is a true unit testing framework; it does not require installing the kernel on a test machine or in a VM (however, KUnit still allows you to run tests on test machines or in VMs if you want[1]) and does not require tests to be written in userspace running on a host kernel. Additionally, KUnit is fast: From invocation to completion KUnit can run several dozen tests in about a second. Currently, the entire KUnit test suite for KUnit runs in under a second from the initial invocation (build time excluded). KUnit is heavily inspired by JUnit, Python's unittest.mock, and Googletest/Googlemock for C++. KUnit provides facilities for defining unit test cases, grouping related test cases into test suites, providing common infrastructure for running tests, mocking, spying, and much more. ### What's so special about unit testing? A unit test is supposed to test a single unit of code in isolation, hence the name. There should be no dependencies outside the control of the test; this means no external dependencies, which makes tests orders of magnitudes faster. Likewise, since there are no external dependencies, there are no hoops to jump through to run the tests. Additionally, this makes unit tests deterministic: a failing unit test always indicates a problem. Finally, because unit tests necessarily have finer granularity, they are able to test all code paths easily solving the classic problem of difficulty in exercising error handling code. ### Is KUnit trying to replace other testing frameworks for the kernel? No. Most existing tests for the Linux kernel are end-to-end tests, which have their place. A well tested system has lots of unit tests, a reasonable number of integration tests, and some end-to-end tests. KUnit is just trying to address the unit test space which is currently not being addressed. ### More information on KUnit There is a bunch of documentation near the end of this patch set that describes how to use KUnit and best practices for writing unit tests. For convenience I am hosting the compiled docs here[2]. Additionally for convenience, I have applied these patches to a branch[3]. The repo may be cloned with: git clone https://kunit.googlesource.com/linux This patchset is on the kunit/rfc/v5.2/v8 branch. ## Changes Since Last Version Like I said in the TL;DR, there is only one minor change since the previous revision. That change only affects patch 06/18; it makes it so that make doesn't attempt to scan the kunit/ directory when CONFIG_KUNIT is not set as suggested by Masahiro. [1] https://google.github.io/kunit-docs/third_party/kernel/docs/usage.html#kuni… [2] https://google.github.io/kunit-docs/third_party/kernel/docs/ [3] https://kunit.googlesource.com/linux/+/kunit/rfc/v5.2/v8 -- 2.22.0.410.gd8fdbe21b5-goog

6 years, 3 months

2
19
0 0

Re: [PATCH v6 18/18] MAINTAINERS: add proc sysctl KUnit test to PROC SYSCTL section

by Iurii Zaikin

> On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 4:16 PM Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins(a)google.com> wrote: >> >> CC'ing Iurii Zaikin >> >> On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 1:48 PM Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof(a)kernel.org> wrote: >> > >> > On Wed, Jul 03, 2019 at 05:36:15PM -0700, Brendan Higgins wrote: >> > > Add entry for the new proc sysctl KUnit test to the PROC SYSCTL section. >> > > >> > > Signed-off-by: Brendan Higgins <brendanhiggins(a)google.com> >> > > Reviewed-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh(a)linuxfoundation.org> >> > > Reviewed-by: Logan Gunthorpe <logang(a)deltatee.com> >> > > Acked-by: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof(a)kernel.org> >> > >> > Come to think of it, I'd welcome Iurii to be added as a maintainer, >> > with the hope Iurii would be up to review only the kunit changes. Of >> > course if Iurii would be up to also help review future proc changes, >> > even better. 3 pair of eyeballs is better than 2 pairs. >> >> What do you think, Iurii? I'm in.

6 years, 4 months

1
0
0 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

Linux-kselftest-mirror