From patchwork Thu Feb 29 06:45:23 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Kui-Feng Lee X-Patchwork-Id: 13576606 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Received: from mail-yw1-f181.google.com (mail-yw1-f181.google.com [209.85.128.181]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E0871481D8 for ; Thu, 29 Feb 2024 06:45:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.181 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709189135; cv=none; b=TBcHhsEI+hMcnTyehuKHBe2ZsdMTG3kBwgj7G33sedJQ/YtvZzgaxoS3GSJK0BihecpicAY1q8Am7jXBIxeRGBCmiwWdGjr23hzcBWMoou3ALlmK5N2llsE3vqGgQ1ilgijzDFSfy8QxjxUTZU9GzAFI5pfbVnTAnilnozTpkuw= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709189135; c=relaxed/simple; bh=kn6v7KWUs2y1IgJecF+yvFbM27olTQ2TFVTijy4UfYA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-Id:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=LpKf6suvnSZgKyZTdnI6VCjZ9DkSAijTsgWEhtwRO0hGCwiqAws2bOUvqHc22slgRPw/qh22zxsiEFzJULXLpiiEfAuxngEFURiAbJ0K1TpdF2vLcDt7M408jyAC0cPKNKEF9lm64MFL9Ng8YlTHDsljAzms8X/tcl6Y/8ae5tA= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=g6V1lVw9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.128.181 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="g6V1lVw9" Received: by mail-yw1-f181.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-60822b444c9so3781877b3.2 for ; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:45:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1709189133; x=1709793933; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=uD8m4gd8/Bnjn5MvoeiCe8GexY6YWfPcvCxDml5btb8=; b=g6V1lVw9qnkU7KuFdrrcvIRqAqP3V8rRdV4vHHy+a2RizYkf4tFlfNSEk9LlFXVP2Q 6fKR7PHj5sy1kssvvPjcp16oRoI6rIMBRa6lWy4yyhntLIEV+ceKIjN2aUapplwDn9hn Nz2o0bwKd19b/jjAXCVLBPzphxiAxUOi/sz7Vu2Ziwa+qIDaeum8f3n1CrsoaE1GQsl/ EZsCKVvXUi6yzhI5yszFp4crnUBVor3cjb0w8KiG1NWLcxJQbj7CU5NviCdnXKQDVVmC t8cf103QG87fpdmeMmJH/qcUX+88x27Guj9Wy5Irsd6vlotPx1Q94yBKdjAVelGxIe6p 6uoQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1709189133; x=1709793933; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=uD8m4gd8/Bnjn5MvoeiCe8GexY6YWfPcvCxDml5btb8=; b=WodwWXeUwii9H8olp/FpcDdONd88CrQF0yuIUTXrLA3Tu93wOrpoB6ViRVwSCBirNT UvyAFvJBLEajyqfBG5+wFFMpXHjsnme2gj2JWClpLCC1deXgYQ+w+PDL2oR69z2TlxMI ySHW0FhYIlD0QrNfD+q5zWh55kpcwKcLrBAL9AKhOzpF/fTNwXKWGw31ONJSqUOIfZmI I9iRj8k/Q3jNEzpXzGfTKTknzBh4S7N3nGa6n/T3AWbGlhsNODpaFcK25KjpdQ1YxkA1 PgEJCxL6S0gJOxSox9JjJoUytc5QzPJotP8I/fYR/aK+rRXWrl/JNQ66xpMdBDla+CIm dBeQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxyb86XLYYzWprQl/kaiZsKECO/xaQvsqEnCivKKhXz71u5YTtT rMtH0jguTn9gT6NMExgYgbnXUz/+ESM4fUyMmfsxSXDZ3TPJu86JwrtvtnVY X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFwHwH7cc3U3e/5Xdh36rPMr3lzlbBY7mMFAjzJ9R2sUtR0/4DtHaCtf8GRjlaT0B7obSodjA== X-Received: by 2002:a0d:f5c1:0:b0:608:aee8:32a8 with SMTP id e184-20020a0df5c1000000b00608aee832a8mr1297511ywf.5.1709189132637; Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:45:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from kickker.attlocal.net ([2600:1700:6cf8:1240:bc86:35de:12f4:eec9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id p14-20020a817e4e000000b006048e2331fcsm208581ywn.91.2024.02.28.22.45.31 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:45:32 -0800 (PST) From: Kui-Feng Lee To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, song@kernel.org, kernel-team@meta.com, andrii@kernel.org, quentin@isovalent.com Cc: sinquersw@gmail.com, kuifeng@meta.com, Kui-Feng Lee Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v6 5/5] selftests/bpf: Test if shadow types work correctly. Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2024 22:45:23 -0800 Message-Id: <20240229064523.2091270-6-thinker.li@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.34.1 In-Reply-To: <20240229064523.2091270-1-thinker.li@gmail.com> References: <20240229064523.2091270-1-thinker.li@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: bpf@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Change the values of fields, including scalar types and function pointers, and check if the struct_ops map works as expected. The test changes the field "test_2" of "testmod_1" from the pointer to test_2() to pointer to test_3() and the field "data" to 13. The function test_2() and test_3() both compute a new value for "test_2_result", but in different way. By checking the value of "test_2_result", it ensures the struct_ops map works as expected with changes through shadow types. Signed-off-by: Kui-Feng Lee --- .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c | 11 ++++++++++- .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h | 8 ++++++++ .../bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c | 19 +++++++++++++++---- .../selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c | 8 ++++++++ 4 files changed, 41 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c index 66787e99ba1b..098ddd067224 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c @@ -539,6 +539,15 @@ static int bpf_testmod_ops_init_member(const struct btf_type *t, const struct btf_member *member, void *kdata, const void *udata) { + if (member->offset == offsetof(struct bpf_testmod_ops, data) * 8) { + /* For data fields, this function has to copy it and return + * 1 to indicate that the data has been handled by the + * struct_ops type, or the verifier will reject the map if + * the value of the data field is not zero. + */ + ((struct bpf_testmod_ops *)kdata)->data = ((struct bpf_testmod_ops *)udata)->data; + return 1; + } return 0; } @@ -559,7 +568,7 @@ static int bpf_dummy_reg(void *kdata) * initialized, so we need to check for NULL. */ if (ops->test_2) - ops->test_2(4, 3); + ops->test_2(4, ops->data); return 0; } diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h index c3b0cf788f9f..971458acfac3 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.h @@ -35,6 +35,14 @@ struct bpf_testmod_ops { void (*test_2)(int a, int b); /* Used to test nullable arguments. */ int (*test_maybe_null)(int dummy, struct task_struct *task); + + /* The following fields are used to test shadow copies. */ + char onebyte; + struct { + int a; + int b; + } unsupported; + int data; }; #endif /* _BPF_TESTMOD_H */ diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c index 8d833f0c7580..7d6facf46ebb 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/test_struct_ops_module.c @@ -32,17 +32,23 @@ static void check_map_info(struct bpf_map_info *info) static void test_struct_ops_load(void) { - DECLARE_LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_object_open_opts, opts); struct struct_ops_module *skel; struct bpf_map_info info = {}; struct bpf_link *link; int err; u32 len; - skel = struct_ops_module__open_opts(&opts); + skel = struct_ops_module__open(); if (!ASSERT_OK_PTR(skel, "struct_ops_module_open")) return; + skel->struct_ops.testmod_1->data = 13; + skel->struct_ops.testmod_1->test_2 = skel->progs.test_3; + /* Since test_2() is not being used, it should be disabled from + * auto-loading, or it will fail to load. + */ + bpf_program__set_autoload(skel->progs.test_2, false); + err = struct_ops_module__load(skel); if (!ASSERT_OK(err, "struct_ops_module_load")) goto cleanup; @@ -56,8 +62,13 @@ static void test_struct_ops_load(void) link = bpf_map__attach_struct_ops(skel->maps.testmod_1); ASSERT_OK_PTR(link, "attach_test_mod_1"); - /* test_2() will be called from bpf_dummy_reg() in bpf_testmod.c */ - ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 7, "test_2_result"); + /* test_3() will be called from bpf_dummy_reg() in bpf_testmod.c + * + * In bpf_testmod.c it will pass 4 and 13 (the value of data) to + * .test_2. So, the value of test_2_result should be 20 (4 + 13 + + * 3). + */ + ASSERT_EQ(skel->bss->test_2_result, 20, "check_shadow_variables"); bpf_link__destroy(link); diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c index b78746b3cef3..25952fa09348 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/struct_ops_module.c @@ -21,9 +21,17 @@ void BPF_PROG(test_2, int a, int b) test_2_result = a + b; } +SEC("struct_ops/test_3") +int BPF_PROG(test_3, int a, int b) +{ + test_2_result = a + b + 3; + return a + b + 3; +} + SEC(".struct_ops.link") struct bpf_testmod_ops testmod_1 = { .test_1 = (void *)test_1, .test_2 = (void *)test_2, + .data = 0x1, };