From patchwork Tue Oct 29 17:26:40 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Eduard Zingerman X-Patchwork-Id: 13855256 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Received: from mail-pl1-f171.google.com (mail-pl1-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (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 18417204032 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:27:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.171 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730222839; cv=none; b=ZaSBXlCtvHmxKk9ie6HX+7P0BXaxCF89QprG++7RFT5N0y03SAMzXDyuH6KZh5+ZNlCcat0IWtkb49cckqITeVe0WM1I+vHV1foayvnhXY2ymMDct5gbtHrQ+ruirpAoNOjOPd/i4BMyszKBTLswFLRRBHRPyMQpLg6QYqx3cfA= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730222839; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PvhO2U3Zswylf68/BwkrhjleRx3mZZMzS7tstJ8QH0g=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version; b=kdpUzPS5OgGnuxjECrwJHHGRjGy2obCSHR9AitZKPYNuFhJpK25p79+AFs93iubNY+EtXJutLsrHYK1lEvxBYcxyc0yy/dzI5dR3kM3zOAmcnX7f85wqI3RI1XPkUIggbebqY9PXtSbRoYXVI85uvvmibrN2x+LTI5ECzKUEYus= 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=d90qOdyG; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.171 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="d90qOdyG" Received: by mail-pl1-f171.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20b5affde14so42051525ad.3 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:16 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730222836; x=1730827636; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DYiwa03g1FQp2+y6EJrqhxVQdbVRyPjN6Z6mKxEsJOY=; b=d90qOdyGVhYZyyBgzTdn2frpcLG3nQaQTtJUnUaOrcqMYtMINuR5Pp/VWf6MgUOJH3 JvPdngW61WmOMrSCv46gZ8/qW/gd30MM+QYOlW/Yx4pRVHalLWkCqM8rG21cp25MA9HP wbxWJMeUZx1MUTxBVbY64bNwHiL9AYN5g6TxaNIhEHePwSq8u5g6X2FwrFOj8MHYhruP AON7a1xHiPKNoEIgpKq0H0qlVPehNLE+hGxspLTnG02RhuSTXDujqqpdECsdlJWjIQqq VIuF8RnfmCwpfCEoIOC3ZwrAlxUR5vcVOVA/jEXM50OD8La0evLsv1vEr8vobtGRpICQ Nyfg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730222836; x=1730827636; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:message-id:date:subject:cc :to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=DYiwa03g1FQp2+y6EJrqhxVQdbVRyPjN6Z6mKxEsJOY=; b=gS+0fSb/9cKE8ulbXa/+aiHbw8oCmK3gVNd7C+iXCwBBOPgk1RrBBSHbfdNqT2/yD3 retyMQ9JxTMDiPDhYmey0Z53M49W98p4RwAp+JrINIGbUPzEca6svHV5TpYYw4knlggR MLcZewR22iaRD+62uT170BJ18gGUemh/Uqq1Kq0XJQNil91aVVAMjOnpDUZR3gtTa6FD Prk2fKNGnTLgicak0SKDdTs6M7+/GNqEF7ZAkzF/ss4wh37qiRLII3zq4hoEWE8tBEzB 7YN0w8B/WoXpM7IbFV4ZJtZCAyuB4TB46sqnHNN46VwNkqKrnTty0H2cJ6H0N2ZwVoox 4CXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzwkOGa6bwevVxvKlz7MaONo/Mrr3qkN5llXHRaQHwyCzOxAkoB oOsS+C+yzN2qEyO57VlyJkHN5vdtUvdtmUsw0SnH0yFkzUAruUbJEwqF8g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGycLKymac4OyRURUaYq7JPbSsTXBFqZGt80sqiuh55OS80f/ZQXz7UAxLagoA3LmDR+DNO3w== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:1205:b0:20c:7509:d948 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-210c68973aamr154798075ad.17.1730222835781; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from honey-badger.. ([38.34.87.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-7edc868c043sm7855855a12.38.2024.10.29.10.27.14 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:15 -0700 (PDT) From: Eduard Zingerman To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev, kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, Eduard Zingerman , syzbot+7e46cdef14bf496a3ab4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Subject: [PATCH bpf v2 1/2] bpf: force checkpoint when jmp history is too long Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:26:40 -0700 Message-ID: <20241029172641.1042523-1-eddyz87@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.0 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 A specifically crafted program might trick verifier into growing very long jump history within a single bpf_verifier_state instance. Very long jump history makes mark_chain_precision() unreasonably slow, especially in case if verifier processes a loop. Mitigate this by forcing new state in is_state_visited() in case if current state's jump history is too long. Use same constant as in `skip_inf_loop_check`, but multiply it by arbitrarily chosen value 2 to account for jump history containing not only information about jumps, but also information about stack access. For an example of problematic program consider the code below, w/o this patch the example is processed by verifier for ~15 minutes, before failing to allocate big-enough chunk for jmp_history. 0: r7 = *(u16 *)(r1 +0);" 1: r7 += 0x1ab064b9;" 2: if r7 & 0x702000 goto 1b; 3: r7 &= 0x1ee60e;" 4: r7 += r1;" 5: if r7 s> 0x37d2 goto +0;" 6: r0 = 0;" 7: exit;" Perf profiling shows that most of the time is spent in mark_chain_precision() ~95%. The easiest way to explain why this program causes problems is to apply the following patch: diff --git a/include/linux/bpf.h b/include/linux/bpf.h index 0c216e71cec7..4b4823961abe 100644 \--- a/include/linux/bpf.h \+++ b/include/linux/bpf.h \@@ -1926,7 +1926,7 @@ struct bpf_array { }; }; -#define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS 1000000 /* yes. 1M insns */ +#define BPF_COMPLEXITY_LIMIT_INSNS 256 /* yes. 1M insns */ #define MAX_TAIL_CALL_CNT 33 /* Maximum number of loops for bpf_loop and bpf_iter_num. diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index f514247ba8ba..75e88be3bb3e 100644 \--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c \+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c \@@ -18024,8 +18024,13 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) skip_inf_loop_check: if (!force_new_state && env->jmps_processed - env->prev_jmps_processed < 20 && - env->insn_processed - env->prev_insn_processed < 100) + env->insn_processed - env->prev_insn_processed < 100) { + verbose(env, "is_state_visited: suppressing checkpoint at %d, %d jmps processed, cur->jmp_history_cnt is %d\n", + env->insn_idx, + env->jmps_processed - env->prev_jmps_processed, + cur->jmp_history_cnt); add_new_state = false; + } goto miss; } /* If sl->state is a part of a loop and this loop's entry is a part of \@@ -18142,6 +18147,9 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) if (!add_new_state) return 0; + verbose(env, "is_state_visited: new checkpoint at %d, resetting env->jmps_processed\n", + env->insn_idx); + /* There were no equivalent states, remember the current one. * Technically the current state is not proven to be safe yet, * but it will either reach outer most bpf_exit (which means it's safe) And observe verification log: ... is_state_visited: new checkpoint at 5, resetting env->jmps_processed 5: R1=ctx() R7=ctx(...) 5: (65) if r7 s> 0x37d2 goto pc+0 ; R7=ctx(...) 6: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0 7: (95) exit from 5 to 6: R1=ctx() R7=ctx(...) R10=fp0 6: R1=ctx() R7=ctx(...) R10=fp0 6: (b7) r0 = 0 ; R0_w=0 7: (95) exit is_state_visited: suppressing checkpoint at 1, 3 jmps processed, cur->jmp_history_cnt is 74 from 2 to 1: R1=ctx() R7_w=scalar(...) R10=fp0 1: R1=ctx() R7_w=scalar(...) R10=fp0 1: (07) r7 += 447767737 is_state_visited: suppressing checkpoint at 2, 3 jmps processed, cur->jmp_history_cnt is 75 2: R7_w=scalar(...) 2: (45) if r7 & 0x702000 goto pc-2 ... mark_precise 152 steps for r7 ... 2: R7_w=scalar(...) is_state_visited: suppressing checkpoint at 1, 4 jmps processed, cur->jmp_history_cnt is 75 1: (07) r7 += 447767737 is_state_visited: suppressing checkpoint at 2, 4 jmps processed, cur->jmp_history_cnt is 76 2: R7_w=scalar(...) 2: (45) if r7 & 0x702000 goto pc-2 ... BPF program is too large. Processed 257 insn The log output shows that checkpoint at label (1) is never created, because it is suppressed by `skip_inf_loop_check` logic: a. When 'if' at (2) is processed it pushes a state with insn_idx (1) onto stack and proceeds to (3); b. At (5) checkpoint is created, and this resets env->{jmps,insns}_processed. c. Verification proceeds and reaches `exit`; d. State saved at step (a) is popped from stack and is_state_visited() considers if checkpoint needs to be added, but because env->{jmps,insns}_processed had been just reset at step (b) the `skip_inf_loop_check` logic forces `add_new_state` to false. e. Verifier proceeds with current state, which slowly accumulates more and more entries in the jump history. The accumulation of entries in the jump history is a problem because of two factors: - it eventually exhausts memory available for kmalloc() allocation; - mark_chain_precision() traverses the jump history of a state, meaning that if `r7` is marked precise, verifier would iterate ever growing jump history until parent state boundary is reached. (note: the log also shows a REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION warning upon jset processing, but that's another bug to fix). With this patch applied, the example above is rejected by verifier under 1s of time, reaching 1M instructions limit. The program is a simplified reproducer from syzbot report. Previous discussion could be found at [1]. The patch does not cause any changes in verification performance, when tested on selftests from veristat.cfg and cilium programs taken from [2]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20241009021254.2805446-1-eddyz87@gmail.com/ [2] https://github.com/anakryiko/cilium Changelog: - v1 -> v2: - moved patch to bpf tree; - moved force_new_state variable initialization after declaration and shortened the comment. v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20241018020307.1766906-1-eddyz87@gmail.com/ Reported-by: syzbot+7e46cdef14bf496a3ab4@syzkaller.appspotmail.com Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/670429f6.050a0220.49194.0517.GAE@google.com/ Fixes: 2589726d12a1 ("bpf: introduce bounded loops") Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman --- kernel/bpf/verifier.c | 9 +++++++-- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c index 587a6c76e564..ca8d7b054163 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c @@ -17886,10 +17886,14 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) struct bpf_verifier_state_list *sl, **pprev; struct bpf_verifier_state *cur = env->cur_state, *new, *loop_entry; int i, j, n, err, states_cnt = 0; - bool force_new_state = env->test_state_freq || is_force_checkpoint(env, insn_idx); - bool add_new_state = force_new_state; + bool force_new_state; + bool add_new_state; bool force_exact; + force_new_state = env->test_state_freq || is_force_checkpoint(env, insn_idx) || + /* Avoid accumulating infinitely long jmp history */ + cur->jmp_history_cnt > 40; + /* bpf progs typically have pruning point every 4 instructions * http://vger.kernel.org/bpfconf2019.html#session-1 * Do not add new state for future pruning if the verifier hasn't seen @@ -17898,6 +17902,7 @@ static int is_state_visited(struct bpf_verifier_env *env, int insn_idx) * In tests that amounts to up to 50% reduction into total verifier * memory consumption and 20% verifier time speedup. */ + add_new_state = force_new_state; if (env->jmps_processed - env->prev_jmps_processed >= 2 && env->insn_processed - env->prev_insn_processed >= 8) add_new_state = true; From patchwork Tue Oct 29 17:26:41 2024 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Patchwork-Submitter: Eduard Zingerman X-Patchwork-Id: 13855257 X-Patchwork-Delegate: bpf@iogearbox.net Received: from mail-pg1-f171.google.com (mail-pg1-f171.google.com [209.85.215.171]) (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 67C78199947 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 17:27:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.171 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730222840; cv=none; b=DKvnvqzm6DEr97v9zmPq0+fMzFCovKvKw+T5L5A3BIRrUdw6nwi0icVbeR0j6xSnnAMuTTCpvIYNRj7pnHYLDqO04S8knCFHdR/6HKL+Nz3jP3fLM36LsSfQ9xWOMFXQyq5ZJ/IBVL2uD4thhm80d9xCjaBJuxTBCHlKqTaEeT8= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1730222840; c=relaxed/simple; bh=6zsTR/sGwfJMIJYKcf7itVpQHQ/TvwPHC4Q3/xdeBcs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=LsczTfxUYB54dX9TOq+vtnVc7vb83LvvEgJiTrrvW845W7YliDcqq2WIcbJG5uamDq83Z6tlG2pkiVWuJ+nL08BrVvq7xlInzcmPIqhtgY6QPjhO80nZpT7AQvim+d8L81l3TnCvZApknNWHesi2P0ov7iyeathoIt+46H/CErc= 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=nR1+W7fW; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.215.171 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="nR1+W7fW" Received: by mail-pg1-f171.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-7eb0bc007edso2837902a12.3 for ; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730222837; x=1730827637; 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=8QokhXn4PCbnv9TcXyPxlYOGZ3dPN4TP9Qe25Vi6hpw=; b=nR1+W7fWdOcrJ4wAkMj+Ia4pa9ktrJmmcCEiP2uFBPLZoViYpx2KrInk1NANFzgArO WAD753DjzcggfMWQQXa3cisQ0z/L7hCT9BIUiK+e5/TYfE/yYzJA52Oz+Nfe5VGQ6wzS FOezZ8O+HaabNF1QmdKHyQCz/vtOiiaMcxNslulgyFF2lnEGc1bXp3sBC2/HEUi96YBl q64zUJOeCA8XLlg7daN/avqcf+b4iZEWZ9WUo/hrPR0Sl7p+vY4eYRA62ScDypdpj8VP sZAa2sMvL6UhEFBnmXivajWCq4maMW6pP0UktTEDk9/kMoAptijLBOZ28vCG3HnmN3yT IpcQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730222837; x=1730827637; 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=8QokhXn4PCbnv9TcXyPxlYOGZ3dPN4TP9Qe25Vi6hpw=; b=a5enhhk55RfGeY2Mq0R5sIF2W0arrxzixf+6tqA/nq4IW+mjvAPE5QQRM8unq5c7ft JoXkrk1THza14w+RKoZmlNBeR9PRtghGZaxX2KDKN5T9dkd9kgdCkGfKtg/u+ZgB07Mf j93ByPXW+rYY2/wBn7o+IlfQWqOvh5tnLXLn1BqlEcOG3/kDKPm47ZZAb6km0nlcywHV im7AaZd7fIQlnFp880NffNPnm57CZY2X8Mw9RKYei5nvwygPtrp9JD+lEPL4pou1OYew KKh0FaSDfypjlcXNMpJg0yubN+KfXOELFgOhemTc+mj3ue97PVw6Ov2W5hnDb1uhKW/g oWEg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YynpJcE0BcZDk3Gm0IOEjS+GbCgdK6UKgqwDFI/KfbRyrIVdCcs +Jo2ER5agqaW8TFvog6j95Eu8dF87cahLNvmv7NUBjrGReqCZAoukC8TOg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHNc2hfEH0HgLwTBCq3Z9/1w/HwG+zRY1eXRKHtur6eIFopOU6IfTc0mlnTiJVz9XQLZoloLg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:1d98:b0:1d4:e4a9:c126 with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1d9a84da054mr16452916637.32.1730222837478; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from honey-badger.. ([38.34.87.7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 41be03b00d2f7-7edc868c043sm7855855a12.38.2024.10.29.10.27.15 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:27:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Eduard Zingerman To: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org Cc: andrii@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, martin.lau@linux.dev, kernel-team@fb.com, yonghong.song@linux.dev, Eduard Zingerman Subject: [PATCH bpf v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: test with a very short loop Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 10:26:41 -0700 Message-ID: <20241029172641.1042523-2-eddyz87@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.47.0 In-Reply-To: <20241029172641.1042523-1-eddyz87@gmail.com> References: <20241029172641.1042523-1-eddyz87@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 The test added is a simplified reproducer from syzbot report [1]. If verifier does not insert checkpoint somewhere inside the loop, verification of the program would take a very long time. This would happen because mark_chain_precision() for register r7 would constantly trace jump history of the loop back, processing many iterations for each mark_chain_precision() call. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/670429f6.050a0220.49194.0517.GAE@google.com/ Acked-by: Daniel Borkmann Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman --- .../bpf/progs/verifier_search_pruning.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++ tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg | 1 + 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_search_pruning.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_search_pruning.c index 5a14498d352f..f40e57251e94 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_search_pruning.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_search_pruning.c @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ /* Converted from tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/search_pruning.c */ #include +#include <../../../include/linux/filter.h> #include #include "bpf_misc.h" @@ -336,4 +337,26 @@ l0_%=: r1 = 42; \ : __clobber_all); } +/* Without checkpoint forcibly inserted at the back-edge a loop this + * test would take a very long time to verify. + */ +SEC("kprobe") +__failure __log_level(4) +__msg("BPF program is too large.") +__naked void short_loop1(void) +{ + asm volatile ( + " r7 = *(u16 *)(r1 +0);" + "1: r7 += 0x1ab064b9;" + " .8byte %[jset];" /* same as 'if r7 & 0x702000 goto 1b;' */ + " r7 &= 0x1ee60e;" + " r7 += r1;" + " if r7 s> 0x37d2 goto +0;" + " r0 = 0;" + " exit;" + : + : __imm_insn(jset, BPF_JMP_IMM(BPF_JSET, BPF_REG_7, 0x702000, -2)) + : __clobber_all); +} + char _license[] SEC("license") = "GPL"; diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg index 1a385061618d..e661ffdcaadf 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/veristat.cfg @@ -15,3 +15,4 @@ test_usdt* test_verif_scale* test_xdp_noinline* xdp_synproxy* +verifier_search_pruning*