@@ -51,6 +51,18 @@ void test_varlen(void)
CHECK_VAL(data->total2, size1 + size2);
CHECK(memcmp(data->payload2, exp_str, size1 + size2), "content_check",
"doesn't match!");
+
+ CHECK_VAL(data->payload3_len1, size1);
+ CHECK_VAL(data->payload3_len2, size2);
+ CHECK_VAL(data->total3, size1 + size2);
+ CHECK(memcmp(data->payload3, exp_str, size1 + size2), "content_check",
+ "doesn't match!");
+
+ CHECK_VAL(data->payload4_len1, size1);
+ CHECK_VAL(data->payload4_len2, size2);
+ CHECK_VAL(data->total4, size1 + size2);
+ CHECK(memcmp(data->payload4, exp_str, size1 + size2), "content_check",
+ "doesn't match!");
cleanup:
test_varlen__destroy(skel);
}
@@ -26,8 +26,18 @@ int payload2_len2 = -1;
int total2 = -1;
char payload2[MAX_LEN + MAX_LEN] = { 1 };
+int payload3_len1 = -1;
+int payload3_len2 = -1;
+int total3= -1;
+char payload3[MAX_LEN + MAX_LEN] = { 1 };
+
+int payload4_len1 = -1;
+int payload4_len2 = -1;
+int total4= -1;
+char payload4[MAX_LEN + MAX_LEN] = { 1 };
+
SEC("raw_tp/sys_enter")
-int handler64(void *regs)
+int handler64_gt(void *regs)
{
int pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32;
void *payload = payload1;
@@ -54,8 +64,36 @@ int handler64(void *regs)
return 0;
}
-SEC("tp_btf/sys_enter")
-int handler32(void *regs)
+SEC("raw_tp/sys_exit")
+int handler64_lt(void *regs)
+{
+ int pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32;
+ void *payload = payload3;
+ long len;
+
+ /* ignore irrelevant invocations */
+ if (test_pid != pid || !capture)
+ return 0;
+
+ len = bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(payload, MAX_LEN, &buf_in1[0]);
+ if (len < 0)
+ goto next_lt_long;
+ payload += len;
+ payload3_len1 = len;
+next_lt_long:
+ len = bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(payload, MAX_LEN, &buf_in2[0]);
+ if (len < 0)
+ goto done_lt_long;
+ payload += len;
+ payload3_len2 = len;
+done_lt_long:
+ total3 = payload - (void *)payload3;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("tp/raw_syscalls/sys_enter")
+int handler32_gt(void *regs)
{
int pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32;
void *payload = payload2;
@@ -82,7 +120,35 @@ int handler32(void *regs)
return 0;
}
-SEC("tp_btf/sys_exit")
+SEC("tp/raw_syscalls/sys_exit")
+int handler32_lt(void *regs)
+{
+ int pid = bpf_get_current_pid_tgid() >> 32;
+ void *payload = payload4;
+ int len;
+
+ /* ignore irrelevant invocations */
+ if (test_pid != pid || !capture)
+ return 0;
+
+ len = bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(payload, MAX_LEN, &buf_in1[0]);
+ if (len < 0)
+ goto next_lt_int;
+ payload += len;
+ payload4_len1 = len;
+next_lt_int:
+ len = bpf_probe_read_kernel_str(payload, MAX_LEN, &buf_in2[0]);
+ if (len < 0)
+ goto done_lt_int;
+ payload += len;
+ payload4_len2 = len;
+done_lt_int:
+ total4 = payload - (void *)payload4;
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
+SEC("tp/syscalls/sys_exit_getpid")
int handler_exit(void *regs)
{
long bla;
Extend original variable-length tests with a case to catch a common existing pattern of testing for < 0 for errors. Note because verifier also tracks upper bounds and we know it can not be greater than MAX_LEN here we can skip upper bound check. In ALU64 enabled compilation converting from long->int return types in probe helpers results in extra instruction pattern, <<= 32, s >>= 32. The trade-off is the non-ALU64 case works. If you really care about every extra insn (XDP case?) then you probably should be using original int type. In addition adding a sext insn to bpf might help the verifier in the general case to avoid these types of tricks. Signed-off-by: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com> --- .../testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/varlen.c | 12 +++ .../testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_varlen.c | 74 ++++++++++++++++++- 2 files changed, 82 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)