aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2024-08-22selftests/bpf: Add testcase for updating attached freplace prog to ↵Leon Hwang1-1/+64
prog_array map Add a selftest to confirm the issue, which gets -EINVAL when update attached freplace prog to prog_array map, has been fixed. cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf; ./test_progs -t tailcalls 328/25 tailcalls/tailcall_freplace:OK 328 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/25 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
2024-07-29selftests/bpf: Add testcases for tailcall hierarchy fixingLeon Hwang1-0/+320
Add some test cases to confirm the tailcall hierarchy issue has been fixed. On x64, the selftests result is: cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf && ./test_progs -t tailcalls 327/18 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_1:OK 327/19 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry:OK 327/20 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fexit:OK 327/21 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_fexit:OK 327/22 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_entry:OK 327/23 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_2:OK 327/24 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_3:OK 327 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/24 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED On arm64, the selftests result is: cd tools/testing/selftests/bpf && ./test_progs -t tailcalls 327/18 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_1:OK 327/19 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry:OK 327/20 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fexit:OK 327/21 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_fexit:OK 327/22 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_fentry_entry:OK 327/23 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_2:OK 327/24 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_hierarchy_3:OK 327 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/24 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]>
2023-12-06selftests/bpf: Add test for early update in prog_array_map_poke_runJiri Olsa1-0/+84
Adding test that tries to trigger the BUG_IN during early map update in prog_array_map_poke_run function. The idea is to share prog array map between thread that constantly updates it and another one loading a program that uses that prog array. Eventually we will hit a place where the program is ok to be updated (poke->tailcall_target_stable check) but the address is still not registered in kallsyms, so the bpf_arch_text_poke returns -EINVAL and cause imbalance for the next tail call update check, which will fail with -EBUSY in bpf_arch_text_poke as described in previous fix. Signed-off-by: Jiri Olsa <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Acked-by: Ilya Leoshkevich <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2023-09-12selftests/bpf: Add testcases for tailcall infinite loop fixingLeon Hwang1-4/+233
Add 4 test cases to confirm the tailcall infinite loop bug has been fixed. Like tailcall_bpf2bpf cases, do fentry/fexit on the bpf2bpf, and then check the final count result. tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_progs -t tailcalls 226/13 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fentry:OK 226/14 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fexit:OK 226/15 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fentry_fexit:OK 226/16 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_fentry_entry:OK 226 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/16 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
2023-09-11selftests/bpf: Correct map_fd to data_fd in tailcallsLeon Hwang1-16/+16
Get and check data_fd. It should not check map_fd again. Meanwhile, correct some 'return' to 'goto out'. Thank the suggestion from Maciej in "bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite loop"[0] discussions. [0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]/T/#m7d3b601066ba66400d436b7e7579b2df4a101033 Fixes: 79d49ba048ec ("bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases") Fixes: 3b0379111197 ("selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests") Fixes: 5e0b0a4c52d3 ("selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stack") Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <[email protected]> Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected] Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <[email protected]>
2022-09-02selftests/bpf: Store BPF object files with .bpf.o extensionDaniel Müller1-18/+18
BPF object files are, in a way, the final artifact produced as part of the ahead-of-time compilation process. That makes them somewhat special compared to "regular" object files, which are a intermediate build artifacts that can typically be removed safely. As such, it can make sense to name them differently to make it easier to spot this difference at a glance. Among others, libbpf-bootstrap [0] has established the extension .bpf.o for BPF object files. It seems reasonable to follow this example and establish the same denomination for selftest build artifacts. To that end, this change adjusts the corresponding part of the build system and the test programs loading BPF object files to work with .bpf.o files. [0] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-bootstrap Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2022-06-16selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stackJakub Sitnicki1-0/+55
Cover the case when tail call count needs to be passed from BPF function to BPF function, and the caller has data on stack. Specifically when the size of data allocated on BPF stack is not a multiple on 8. Signed-off-by: Jakub Sitnicki <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2022-02-02selftests/bpf: Migrate from bpf_prog_test_runDelyan Kratunov1-115/+123
bpf_prog_test_run is being deprecated in favor of the OPTS-based bpf_prog_test_run_opts. We end up unable to use CHECK in most cases, so replace usages with ASSERT_* calls. Signed-off-by: Delyan Kratunov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2022-01-12selftests/bpf: Stop using bpf_map__def() APIChristy Lee1-18/+18
libbpf bpf_map__def() API is being deprecated, replace selftests/bpf's usage with the appropriate getters and setters. Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2021-11-07selftests/bpf: Use explicit bpf_prog_test_load() calls everywhereAndrii Nakryiko1-9/+9
-Dbpf_prog_load_deprecated=bpf_prog_test_load trick is both ugly and breaks when deprecation goes into effect due to macro magic. Convert all the uses to explicit bpf_prog_test_load() calls which avoid deprecation errors and makes everything less magical. Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Dave Marchevsky <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2021-09-28selftests/bpf: Switch SEC("classifier*") usage to a strict SEC("tc")Andrii Nakryiko1-29/+29
Convert all SEC("classifier*") uses to a new and strict SEC("tc") section name. In reference_tracking selftests switch from ambiguous searching by program title (section name) to non-ambiguous searching by name in some selftests, getting closer to completely removing bpf_object__find_program_by_title(). Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2021-09-13bpf, selftests: Replicate tailcall limit test for indirect call caseDaniel Borkmann1-5/+20
The tailcall_3 test program uses bpf_tail_call_static() where the JIT would patch a direct jump. Add a new tailcall_6 test program replicating exactly the same test just ensuring that bpf_tail_call() uses a map index where the verifier cannot make assumptions this time. In other words, this will now cover both on x86-64 JIT, meaning, JIT images with emit_bpf_tail_call_direct() emission as well as JIT images with emit_bpf_tail_call_indirect() emission. # echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable # ./test_progs -t tailcalls #136/1 tailcalls/tailcall_1:OK #136/2 tailcalls/tailcall_2:OK #136/3 tailcalls/tailcall_3:OK #136/4 tailcalls/tailcall_4:OK #136/5 tailcalls/tailcall_5:OK #136/6 tailcalls/tailcall_6:OK #136/7 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_1:OK #136/8 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_2:OK #136/9 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_3:OK #136/10 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_4:OK #136/11 tailcalls/tailcall_bpf2bpf_5:OK #136 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/11 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED # echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable # ./test_progs -t tailcalls #136/1 tailcalls/tailcall_1:OK #136/2 tailcalls/tailcall_2:OK #136/3 tailcalls/tailcall_3:OK #136/4 tailcalls/tailcall_4:OK #136/5 tailcalls/tailcall_5:OK #136/6 tailcalls/tailcall_6:OK [...] For interpreter, the tailcall_1-6 tests are passing as well. The later tailcall_bpf2bpf_* are failing due lack of bpf2bpf + tailcall support in interpreter, so this is expected. Also, manual inspection shows that both loaded programs from tailcall_3 and tailcall_6 test case emit the expected opcodes: * tailcall_3 disasm, emit_bpf_tail_call_direct(): [...] b: push %rax c: push %rbx d: push %r13 f: mov %rdi,%rbx 12: movabs $0xffff8d3f5afb0200,%r13 1c: mov %rbx,%rdi 1f: mov %r13,%rsi 22: xor %edx,%edx _ 24: mov -0x4(%rbp),%eax | limit check 2a: cmp $0x20,%eax | 2d: ja 0x0000000000000046 | 2f: add $0x1,%eax | 32: mov %eax,-0x4(%rbp) |_ 38: nopl 0x0(%rax,%rax,1) 3d: pop %r13 3f: pop %rbx 40: pop %rax 41: jmpq 0xffffffffffffe377 [...] * tailcall_6 disasm, emit_bpf_tail_call_indirect(): [...] 47: movabs $0xffff8d3f59143a00,%rsi 51: mov %edx,%edx 53: cmp %edx,0x24(%rsi) 56: jbe 0x0000000000000093 _ 58: mov -0x4(%rbp),%eax | limit check 5e: cmp $0x20,%eax | 61: ja 0x0000000000000093 | 63: add $0x1,%eax | 66: mov %eax,-0x4(%rbp) |_ 6c: mov 0x110(%rsi,%rdx,8),%rcx 74: test %rcx,%rcx 77: je 0x0000000000000093 79: pop %rax 7a: mov 0x30(%rcx),%rcx 7e: add $0xb,%rcx 82: callq 0x000000000000008e 87: pause 89: lfence 8c: jmp 0x0000000000000087 8e: mov %rcx,(%rsp) 92: retq [...] Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Tested-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]> Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <[email protected]> Acked-by: Paul Chaignon <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAM1=_QRyRVCODcXo_Y6qOm1iT163HoiSj8U2pZ8Rj3hzMTT=HQ@mail.gmail.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2021-07-09bpf: Selftest to verify mixing bpf2bpf calls and tailcalls with insn patchJohn Fastabend1-10/+26
This adds some extra noise to the tailcall_bpf2bpf4 tests that will cause verify to patch insns. This then moves around subprog start/end insn index and poke descriptor insn index to ensure that verify and JIT will continue to track these correctly. If done correctly verifier should pass this program same as before and JIT should emit tail call logic. Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/[email protected]
2020-09-17selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf testsMaciej Fijalkowski1-0/+332
Add four tests to tailcalls selftest explicitly named "tailcall_bpf2bpf_X" as their purpose is to validate that combination of tailcalls with bpf2bpf calls are working properly. These tests also validate LD_ABS from subprograms. Signed-off-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
2019-11-24bpf, testing: Add various tail call test casesDaniel Borkmann1-0/+487
Add several BPF kselftest cases for tail calls which test the various patch directions, and that multiple locations are patched in same and different programs. # ./test_progs -n 45 #45/1 tailcall_1:OK #45/2 tailcall_2:OK #45/3 tailcall_3:OK #45/4 tailcall_4:OK #45/5 tailcall_5:OK #45 tailcalls:OK Summary: 1/5 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED I've also verified the JITed dump after each of the rewrite cases that it matches expectations. Also regular test_verifier suite passes fine which contains further tail call tests: # ./test_verifier [...] Summary: 1563 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED Checked under JIT, interpreter and JIT + hardening. Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <[email protected]> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/3d6cbecbeb171117dccfe153306e479798fb608d.1574452833.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
Powered by cgit, Gruvboxed by Blaster4385.