aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiffstatshomepage
path: root/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/spin_lock.c (follow)
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2024-02-05selftests/bpf: Add test for static subprog call in lock csKumar Kartikeya Dwivedi1-0/+2
Add selftests for static subprog calls within bpf_spin_lock critical section, and ensure we still reject global subprog calls. Also test the case where a subprog call will unlock the caller's held lock, or the caller will unlock a lock taken by a subprog call, ensuring correct transfer of lock state across frames on exit. Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> Acked-by: David Vernet <void@manifault.com> Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240204222349.938118-3-memxor@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-11-18bpf: omit default off=0 and imm=0 in register state logAndrii Nakryiko1-7/+7
Simplify BPF verifier log further by omitting default (and frequently irrelevant) off=0 and imm=0 parts for non-SCALAR_VALUE registers. As can be seen from fixed tests, this is often a visual noise for PTR_TO_CTX register and even for PTR_TO_PACKET registers. Omitting default values follows the rest of register state logic: we omit default values to keep verifier log succinct and to highlight interesting state that deviates from default one. E.g., we do the same for var_off, when it's unknown, which gives no additional information. Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231118034623.3320920-7-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-11-18bpf: emit map name in register state if applicable and availableAndrii Nakryiko1-5/+5
In complicated real-world applications, whenever debugging some verification error through verifier log, it often would be very useful to see map name for PTR_TO_MAP_VALUE register. Usually this needs to be inferred from key/value sizes and maybe trying to guess C code location, but it's not always clear. Given verifier has the name, and it's never too long, let's just emit it for ptr_to_map_key, ptr_to_map_value, and const_ptr_to_map registers. We reshuffle the order a bit, so that map name, key size, and value size appear before offset and immediate values, which seems like a more logical order. Current output: R1_w=map_ptr(map=array_map,ks=4,vs=8,off=0,imm=0) But we'll get rid of useless off=0 and imm=0 parts in the next patch. Acked-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> Signed-off-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231118034623.3320920-6-andrii@kernel.org Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2023-08-08selftests/bpf: relax expected log messages to allow emitting BPF_STEduard Zingerman1-5/+32
Update [1] to LLVM BPF backend seeks to enable generation of BPF_ST instruction when CPUv4 is selected. This affects expected log messages for the following selftests: - log_fixup/missing_map - spin_lock/lock_id_mapval_preserve - spin_lock/lock_id_innermapval_preserve Expected messages in these tests hard-code instruction numbers for BPF programs compiled from C. These instruction numbers change when BPF_ST is allowed because single BPF_ST instruction replaces a pair of BPF_MOV/BPF_STX instructions, e.g.: r1 = 42; *(u32 *)(r10 - 8) = r1; ---> *(u32 *)(r10 - 8) = 42; This commit updates expected log messages to avoid matching specific instruction numbers (program position still could be uniquely identified). [1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D140804 "[BPF] support for BPF_ST instruction in codegen" Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com> Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230808162755.392606-1-eddyz87@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
2022-11-18selftests/bpf: Skip spin lock failure test on s390xKumar Kartikeya Dwivedi1-0/+6
Instead of adding the whole test to DENYLIST.s390x, which also has success test cases that should be run, just skip over failure test cases in case the JIT does not support kfuncs. Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221118185938.2139616-3-memxor@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2022-11-17selftests/bpf: Add failure test cases for spin lock pairingKumar Kartikeya Dwivedi1-1/+88
First, ensure that whenever a bpf_spin_lock is present in an allocation, the reg->id is preserved. This won't be true for global variables however, since they have a single map value per map, hence the verifier harcodes it to 0 (so that multiple pseudo ldimm64 insns can yield the same lock object per map at a given offset). Next, add test cases for all possible combinations (kptr, global, map value, inner map value). Since we lifted restriction on locking in inner maps, also add test cases for them. Currently, each lookup into an inner map gets a fresh reg->id, so even if the reg->map_ptr is same, they will be treated as separate allocations and the incorrect unlock pairing will be rejected. Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221118015614.2013203-22-memxor@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
2022-11-17selftests/bpf: Update spinlock selftestKumar Kartikeya Dwivedi1-0/+49
Make updates in preparation for adding more test cases to this selftest: - Convert from CHECK_ to ASSERT macros. - Use BPF skeleton - Fix typo sping -> spin - Rename spinlock.c -> spin_lock.c Signed-off-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20221118015614.2013203-21-memxor@gmail.com Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>