aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstats
path: root/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tailcalls.c (follow)
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
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 <jakub@cloudflare.com> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220616162037.535469-3-jakub@cloudflare.com
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 <delyank@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220202235423.1097270-2-delyank@fb.com
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 <christylee@fb.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220108004218.355761-5-christylee@fb.com
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 <andrii@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20211103220845.2676888-12-andrii@kernel.org
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 <andrii@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210928161946.2512801-4-andrii@kernel.org
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 <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Tested-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com> Acked-by: Johan Almbladh <johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com> Acked-by: Paul Chaignon <paul@cilium.io> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAM1=_QRyRVCODcXo_Y6qOm1iT163HoiSj8U2pZ8Rj3hzMTT=HQ@mail.gmail.com Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210910091900.16119-1-daniel@iogearbox.net
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 <john.fastabend@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20210707223848.14580-3-john.fastabend@gmail.com
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 <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
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 <daniel@iogearbox.net> Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org> Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@fb.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/3d6cbecbeb171117dccfe153306e479798fb608d.1574452833.git.daniel@iogearbox.net
Copyright © 1996 – 2023 Jason A. Donenfeld. All Rights Reverse Engineered.