Merge branch 'improve-test-coverage-sparc'

David Miller says:

====================
On sparc64 a ton of test cases in test_verifier.c fail because
the memory accesses in the test case are unaligned (or cannot
be proven to be aligned by the verifier).

Perhaps we can eventually try to (carefully) modify each test case
which has this problem to not use unaligned accesses but:

1) That is delicate work.

2) The changes might not fully respect the original
   intention of the testcase.

3) In some cases, such a transformation might not even
   be feasible at all.

So add an "any alignment" flag to tell the verifier to forcefully
disable it's alignment checks completely.

test_verifier.c is then annotated to use this flag when necessary.

The presence of the flag in each test case is good documentation to
anyone who wants to actually tackle the job of eliminating the
unaligned memory accesses in the test cases.

I've also seen several weird things in test cases, like trying to
access __skb->mark in a packet buffer.

This gets rid of 104 test_verifier.c failures on sparc64.

Changes since v1:

1) Explain the new BPF_PROG_LOAD flag in easier to understand terms.
   Suggested by Alexei.

2) Make bpf_verify_program() just take a __u32 prog_flags instead of
   just accumulating boolean arguments over and over.  Also suggested
   by Alexei.

Changes since RFC:

1) Only the admin can allow the relaxation of alignment restrictions
   on inefficient unaligned access architectures.

2) Use F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS instead of making a new
   flag.

3) Annotate in the output, when we have a test case that the verifier
   accepted but we did not try to execute because we are on an
   inefficient unaligned access platform.  Maybe with some arch
   machinery we can avoid this in the future.

Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
====================

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>

8 files changed, 128 insertions, 25 deletions

diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index 597afdbc1ab9..8050caea7495 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -232,6 +232,20 @@ enum bpf_attach_type {
  */
 #define BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT	(1U << 0)
 
+/* If BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT is used in BPF_PROF_LOAD command, the
+ * verifier will allow any alignment whatsoever.  On platforms
+ * with strict alignment requirements for loads ands stores (such
+ * as sparc and mips) the verifier validates that all loads and
+ * stores provably follow this requirement.  This flag turns that
+ * checking and enforcement off.
+ *
+ * It is mostly used for testing when we want to validate the
+ * context and memory access aspects of the verifier, but because
+ * of an unaligned access the alignment check would trigger before
+ * the one we are interested in.
+ */
+#define BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT	(1U << 1)
+
 /* when bpf_ldimm64->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD, bpf_ldimm64->imm == fd */
 #define BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD	1
 
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
index 85cbeec06e50..f9554d9a14e1 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/syscall.c
@@ -1452,9 +1452,14 @@ static int bpf_prog_load(union bpf_attr *attr, union bpf_attr __user *uattr)
 	if (CHECK_ATTR(BPF_PROG_LOAD))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
-	if (attr->prog_flags & ~BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT)
+	if (attr->prog_flags & ~(BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT | BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT))
 		return -EINVAL;
 
+	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) &&
+	    (attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT) &&
+	    !capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
+		return -EPERM;
+
 	/* copy eBPF program license from user space */
 	if (strncpy_from_user(license, u64_to_user_ptr(attr->license),
 			      sizeof(license) - 1) < 0)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
index 9584438fa2cc..71988337ac14 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/verifier.c
@@ -6505,6 +6505,8 @@ int bpf_check(struct bpf_prog **prog, union bpf_attr *attr,
 	env->strict_alignment = !!(attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT);
 	if (!IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS))
 		env->strict_alignment = true;
+	if (attr->prog_flags & BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT)
+		env->strict_alignment = false;
 
 	ret = replace_map_fd_with_map_ptr(env);
 	if (ret < 0)
diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
index 597afdbc1ab9..8050caea7495 100644
--- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
+++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
@@ -232,6 +232,20 @@ enum bpf_attach_type {
  */
 #define BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT	(1U << 0)
 
+/* If BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT is used in BPF_PROF_LOAD command, the
+ * verifier will allow any alignment whatsoever.  On platforms
+ * with strict alignment requirements for loads ands stores (such
+ * as sparc and mips) the verifier validates that all loads and
+ * stores provably follow this requirement.  This flag turns that
+ * checking and enforcement off.
+ *
+ * It is mostly used for testing when we want to validate the
+ * context and memory access aspects of the verifier, but because
+ * of an unaligned access the alignment check would trigger before
+ * the one we are interested in.
+ */
+#define BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT	(1U << 1)
+
 /* when bpf_ldimm64->src_reg == BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD, bpf_ldimm64->imm == fd */
 #define BPF_PSEUDO_MAP_FD	1
 
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
index ce1822194590..c19226cccf39 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c
@@ -279,9 +279,9 @@ int bpf_load_program(enum bpf_prog_type type, const struct bpf_insn *insns,
 }
 
 int bpf_verify_program(enum bpf_prog_type type, const struct bpf_insn *insns,
-		       size_t insns_cnt, int strict_alignment,
-		       const char *license, __u32 kern_version,
-		       char *log_buf, size_t log_buf_sz, int log_level)
+		       size_t insns_cnt, __u32 prog_flags, const char *license,
+		       __u32 kern_version, char *log_buf, size_t log_buf_sz,
+		       int log_level)
 {
 	union bpf_attr attr;
 
@@ -295,7 +295,7 @@ int bpf_verify_program(enum bpf_prog_type type, const struct bpf_insn *insns,
 	attr.log_level = log_level;
 	log_buf[0] = 0;
 	attr.kern_version = kern_version;
-	attr.prog_flags = strict_alignment ? BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT : 0;
+	attr.prog_flags = prog_flags;
 
 	return sys_bpf(BPF_PROG_LOAD, &attr, sizeof(attr));
 }
diff --git a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
index 09e8bbe111d4..60392b70587c 100644
--- a/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
+++ b/tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h
@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ LIBBPF_API int bpf_load_program(enum bpf_prog_type type,
 				char *log_buf, size_t log_buf_sz);
 LIBBPF_API int bpf_verify_program(enum bpf_prog_type type,
 				  const struct bpf_insn *insns,
-				  size_t insns_cnt, int strict_alignment,
+				  size_t insns_cnt, __u32 prog_flags,
 				  const char *license, __u32 kern_version,
 				  char *log_buf, size_t log_buf_sz,
 				  int log_level);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c
index 5f377ec53f2f..3c789d03b629 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c
@@ -620,8 +620,8 @@ static int do_test_single(struct bpf_align_test *test)
 
 	prog_len = probe_filter_length(prog);
 	fd_prog = bpf_verify_program(prog_type ? : BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER,
-				     prog, prog_len, 1, "GPL", 0,
-				     bpf_vlog, sizeof(bpf_vlog), 2);
+				     prog, prog_len, BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
+				     "GPL", 0, bpf_vlog, sizeof(bpf_vlog), 2);
 	if (fd_prog < 0 && test->result != REJECT) {
 		printf("Failed to load program.\n");
 		printf("%s", bpf_vlog);
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 5eace1f606fb..c3b038f26ece 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -1823,6 +1823,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_MSG,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet read for SK_MSG",
@@ -2215,6 +2216,8 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.errstr = "invalid bpf_context access",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"check cb access: half, wrong type",
@@ -3281,6 +3284,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs corruption 2",
@@ -3311,6 +3315,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "R3 invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"raw_stack: skb_load_bytes, spilled regs + data",
@@ -3810,6 +3815,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R2 invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test16 (arith on data_end)",
@@ -3912,6 +3918,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test21 (x += pkt_ptr, 2)",
@@ -3937,6 +3944,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test22 (x += pkt_ptr, 3)",
@@ -3967,6 +3975,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test23 (x += pkt_ptr, 4)",
@@ -3993,6 +4002,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to packet, off=0 size=8, R5(id=1,off=0,r=0)",
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test24 (x += pkt_ptr, 5)",
@@ -4018,6 +4028,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"direct packet access: test25 (marking on <, good access)",
@@ -5149,6 +5160,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=64 off=-2 size=4",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"invalid cgroup storage access 5",
@@ -5265,6 +5277,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=64 off=-2 size=4",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_CGROUP_SKB,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"invalid per-cpu cgroup storage access 5",
@@ -7206,6 +7219,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.result_unpriv = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"map element value illegal alu op, 5",
@@ -7228,6 +7242,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.fixup_map_hash_48b = { 3 },
 		.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"map element value is preserved across register spilling",
@@ -7721,6 +7736,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.retval = 0 /* csum_diff of 64-byte packet */,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"helper access to variable memory: size = 0 not allowed on NULL (!ARG_PTR_TO_MEM_OR_NULL)",
@@ -9683,6 +9699,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' > pkt_end, bad access 1",
@@ -9720,6 +9737,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end > pkt_data', good access",
@@ -9758,6 +9776,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end > pkt_data', bad access 2",
@@ -9776,6 +9795,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' < pkt_end, good access",
@@ -9814,6 +9834,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' < pkt_end, bad access 2",
@@ -9832,6 +9853,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end < pkt_data', good access",
@@ -9849,6 +9871,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end < pkt_data', bad access 1",
@@ -9886,6 +9909,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' >= pkt_end, good access",
@@ -9922,6 +9946,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' >= pkt_end, bad access 2",
@@ -9959,6 +9984,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end >= pkt_data', bad access 1",
@@ -9997,6 +10023,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' <= pkt_end, good access",
@@ -10015,6 +10042,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data' <= pkt_end, bad access 1",
@@ -10053,6 +10081,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end <= pkt_data', good access",
@@ -10089,6 +10118,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_end <= pkt_data', bad access 2",
@@ -10125,6 +10155,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' > pkt_data, bad access 1",
@@ -10162,6 +10193,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data > pkt_meta', good access",
@@ -10200,6 +10232,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data > pkt_meta', bad access 2",
@@ -10218,6 +10251,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' < pkt_data, good access",
@@ -10256,6 +10290,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' < pkt_data, bad access 2",
@@ -10274,6 +10309,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data < pkt_meta', good access",
@@ -10291,6 +10327,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data < pkt_meta', bad access 1",
@@ -10328,6 +10365,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' >= pkt_data, good access",
@@ -10364,6 +10402,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' >= pkt_data, bad access 2",
@@ -10401,6 +10440,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data >= pkt_meta', bad access 1",
@@ -10439,6 +10479,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' <= pkt_data, good access",
@@ -10457,6 +10498,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_meta' <= pkt_data, bad access 1",
@@ -10495,6 +10537,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data <= pkt_meta', good access",
@@ -10531,6 +10574,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.errstr = "R1 offset is outside of the packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"XDP pkt read, pkt_data <= pkt_meta', bad access 2",
@@ -10635,6 +10679,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "dereference of modified ctx ptr",
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"check deducing bounds from const, 8",
@@ -10648,6 +10693,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "dereference of modified ctx ptr",
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"check deducing bounds from const, 9",
@@ -11122,6 +11168,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "R6 invalid mem access 'inv'",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: two calls with args",
@@ -11987,6 +12034,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.fixup_map_hash_8b = { 12, 22 },
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=8 off=2 size=8",
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: two calls that receive map_value via arg=ptr_stack_of_caller. test2",
@@ -12130,6 +12178,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.fixup_map_hash_8b = { 12, 22 },
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to map value, value_size=8 off=2 size=8",
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: two calls that receive map_value_ptr_or_null via arg. test1",
@@ -12301,6 +12350,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.retval = POINTER_VALUE,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 2",
@@ -12332,6 +12382,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 3",
@@ -12367,6 +12418,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.retval = 1,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 4",
@@ -12401,6 +12453,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
 		.retval = 1,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 5",
@@ -12434,6 +12487,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "same insn cannot be used with different",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 6",
@@ -12469,6 +12523,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 7",
@@ -12503,6 +12558,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "R4 invalid mem access",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 8",
@@ -12543,6 +12599,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: pkt_ptr spill into caller stack 9",
@@ -12584,6 +12641,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "invalid access to packet",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"calls: caller stack init to zero or map_value_or_null",
@@ -12949,6 +13007,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.result = REJECT,
 		.errstr = "BPF_XADD stores into R2 pkt is not allowed",
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"xadd/w check whether src/dst got mangled, 1",
@@ -13435,6 +13494,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.errstr = "Unreleased reference",
 		.result = REJECT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"reference tracking: alloc, check, free in both subbranches",
@@ -13463,6 +13523,7 @@ static struct bpf_test tests[] = {
 		},
 		.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
 		.result = ACCEPT,
+		.flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
 	},
 	{
 		"reference tracking in call: free reference in subprog",
@@ -14257,13 +14318,14 @@ out:
 static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
 			   int *passes, int *errors)
 {
-	int fd_prog, expected_ret, reject_from_alignment;
+	int fd_prog, expected_ret, alignment_prevented_execution;
 	int prog_len, prog_type = test->prog_type;
 	struct bpf_insn *prog = test->insns;
 	int map_fds[MAX_NR_MAPS];
 	const char *expected_err;
 	uint32_t expected_val;
 	uint32_t retval;
+	__u32 pflags;
 	int i, err;
 
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)
@@ -14274,8 +14336,12 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
 	do_test_fixup(test, prog_type, prog, map_fds);
 	prog_len = probe_filter_length(prog);
 
-	fd_prog = bpf_verify_program(prog_type, prog, prog_len,
-				     test->flags & F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT,
+	pflags = 0;
+	if (test->flags & F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT)
+		pflags |= BPF_F_STRICT_ALIGNMENT;
+	if (test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)
+		pflags |= BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT;
+	fd_prog = bpf_verify_program(prog_type, prog, prog_len, pflags,
 				     "GPL", 0, bpf_vlog, sizeof(bpf_vlog), 1);
 
 	expected_ret = unpriv && test->result_unpriv != UNDEF ?
@@ -14285,28 +14351,27 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
 	expected_val = unpriv && test->retval_unpriv ?
 		       test->retval_unpriv : test->retval;
 
-	reject_from_alignment = fd_prog < 0 &&
-				(test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS) &&
-				strstr(bpf_vlog, "misaligned");
-#ifdef CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
-	if (reject_from_alignment) {
-		printf("FAIL\nFailed due to alignment despite having efficient unaligned access: '%s'!\n",
-		       strerror(errno));
-		goto fail_log;
-	}
-#endif
+	alignment_prevented_execution = 0;
+
 	if (expected_ret == ACCEPT) {
-		if (fd_prog < 0 && !reject_from_alignment) {
+		if (fd_prog < 0) {
 			printf("FAIL\nFailed to load prog '%s'!\n",
 			       strerror(errno));
 			goto fail_log;
 		}
+#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+		if (fd_prog >= 0 &&
+		    (test->flags & F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS)) {
+			alignment_prevented_execution = 1;
+			goto test_ok;
+		}
+#endif
 	} else {
 		if (fd_prog >= 0) {
 			printf("FAIL\nUnexpected success to load!\n");
 			goto fail_log;
 		}
-		if (!strstr(bpf_vlog, expected_err) && !reject_from_alignment) {
+		if (!strstr(bpf_vlog, expected_err)) {
 			printf("FAIL\nUnexpected error message!\n\tEXP: %s\n\tRES: %s\n",
 			      expected_err, bpf_vlog);
 			goto fail_log;
@@ -14334,9 +14399,12 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
 			goto fail_log;
 		}
 	}
+#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS
+test_ok:
+#endif
 	(*passes)++;
-	printf("OK%s\n", reject_from_alignment ?
-	       " (NOTE: reject due to unknown alignment)" : "");
+	printf("OK%s\n", alignment_prevented_execution ?
+	       " (NOTE: not executed due to unknown alignment)" : "");
 close_fds:
 	close(fd_prog);
 	for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)