| Message ID | 20230327153538.850440-1-xukuohai@huaweicloud.com |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [bpf-next] selftests/bpf: Remove two infinite loop bound check cases | expand |
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 7:45 PM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> > > The two infinite loop bound check cases added by commit > 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") > take a long time to execute but don't add much value. > > Remove them to reduce run time of test_verifier. Summary: 2042 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED real 0m4.780s user 0m0.458s sys 0m3.871s 5 seconds isn't such a long time, especially when we compare it to test_progs (even with parallelization). > > Fixes: 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") > Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> > --- > tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c | 50 ------------------- > 1 file changed, 50 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > index 74b1917d4208..515a8222f08f 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > @@ -777,31 +777,6 @@ > .result = ACCEPT, > .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > }, > -{ > - "bound check with JMP_JSLT for crossing 64-bit signed boundary", > - .insns = { > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), > - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), > - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), > - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 8), > - > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), > - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffffffffffff10), > - BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), > - > - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x8000000000000000), > - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), > - /* r1 signed range is [S64_MIN, S64_MAX] */ > - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), > - > - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > - }, > - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", > - .result = REJECT, > - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > -}, > { > "bound check for loop upper bound greater than U32_MAX", > .insns = { > @@ -849,28 +824,3 @@ > .result = ACCEPT, > .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > }, > -{ > - "bound check with JMP32_JSLT for crossing 32-bit signed boundary", > - .insns = { > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), > - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), > - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), > - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 6), > - > - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), > - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffff10), > - BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), > - > - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x80000000), > - BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), > - /* r1 signed range is [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] */ > - BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), > - > - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > - }, > - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", > - .result = REJECT, > - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > -}, > -- > 2.30.2 >
On 3/27/2023 11:20 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 7:45 PM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> wrote: >> >> From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> >> >> The two infinite loop bound check cases added by commit >> 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") >> take a long time to execute but don't add much value. >> >> Remove them to reduce run time of test_verifier. > > Summary: 2042 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED > > real 0m4.780s > user 0m0.458s > sys 0m3.871s > > > 5 seconds isn't such a long time, especially when we compare it to > test_progs (even with parallelization). > Well, I actually don't know if it is "long time". This patch was sent to address Alexei's concern about the run time of test_verifier in mail [1]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230322213056.2470-1-daniel@iogearbox.net/T/#mb3d6363a693ccd63d416d9d787db17f8fdcb8442 >> >> Fixes: 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") >> Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> >> --- >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c | 50 ------------------- >> 1 file changed, 50 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c >> index 74b1917d4208..515a8222f08f 100644 >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c >> @@ -777,31 +777,6 @@ >> .result = ACCEPT, >> .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, >> }, >> -{ >> - "bound check with JMP_JSLT for crossing 64-bit signed boundary", >> - .insns = { >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), >> - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 8), >> - >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), >> - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffffffffffff10), >> - BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), >> - >> - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x8000000000000000), >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), >> - /* r1 signed range is [S64_MIN, S64_MAX] */ >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), >> - >> - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), >> - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), >> - }, >> - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", >> - .result = REJECT, >> - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, >> -}, >> { >> "bound check for loop upper bound greater than U32_MAX", >> .insns = { >> @@ -849,28 +824,3 @@ >> .result = ACCEPT, >> .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, >> }, >> -{ >> - "bound check with JMP32_JSLT for crossing 32-bit signed boundary", >> - .insns = { >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), >> - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 6), >> - >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), >> - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffff10), >> - BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), >> - >> - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x80000000), >> - BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), >> - /* r1 signed range is [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] */ >> - BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), >> - >> - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), >> - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), >> - }, >> - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", >> - .result = REJECT, >> - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, >> -}, >> -- >> 2.30.2 >> > .
On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 11:21 PM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > > On 3/27/2023 11:20 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote: > > On Sun, Mar 26, 2023 at 7:45 PM Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huaweicloud.com> wrote: > >> > >> From: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> > >> > >> The two infinite loop bound check cases added by commit > >> 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") > >> take a long time to execute but don't add much value. > >> > >> Remove them to reduce run time of test_verifier. > > > > Summary: 2042 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED > > > > real 0m4.780s > > user 0m0.458s > > sys 0m3.871s > > > > > > 5 seconds isn't such a long time, especially when we compare it to > > test_progs (even with parallelization). > > > > Well, I actually don't know if it is "long time". > > This patch was sent to address Alexei's concern about the run time > of test_verifier in mail [1]. > These infinite loops don't add much value to the actual test. > Please rewrite them without infinite loops. Alexei asked to improve the test, not to just remove it, if I understand correctly. If the test is there, presumably it's useful. If it can be implemented better, let's do that. Just removing the test seems like a wrong move. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20230322213056.2470-1-daniel@iogearbox.net/T/#mb3d6363a693ccd63d416d9d787db17f8fdcb8442 > > >> > >> Fixes: 1a3148fc171f ("selftests/bpf: Check when bounds are not in the 32-bit range") > >> Signed-off-by: Xu Kuohai <xukuohai@huawei.com> > >> --- > >> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c | 50 ------------------- > >> 1 file changed, 50 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > >> index 74b1917d4208..515a8222f08f 100644 > >> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > >> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c > >> @@ -777,31 +777,6 @@ > >> .result = ACCEPT, > >> .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > >> }, > >> -{ > >> - "bound check with JMP_JSLT for crossing 64-bit signed boundary", > >> - .insns = { > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), > >> - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), > >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), > >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 8), > >> - > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), > >> - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffffffffffff10), > >> - BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), > >> - > >> - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x8000000000000000), > >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), > >> - /* r1 signed range is [S64_MIN, S64_MAX] */ > >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), > >> - > >> - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > >> - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > >> - }, > >> - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", > >> - .result = REJECT, > >> - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > >> -}, > >> { > >> "bound check for loop upper bound greater than U32_MAX", > >> .insns = { > >> @@ -849,28 +824,3 @@ > >> .result = ACCEPT, > >> .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > >> }, > >> -{ > >> - "bound check with JMP32_JSLT for crossing 32-bit signed boundary", > >> - .insns = { > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), > >> - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), > >> - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), > >> - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 6), > >> - > >> - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), > >> - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffff10), > >> - BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), > >> - > >> - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x80000000), > >> - BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), > >> - /* r1 signed range is [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] */ > >> - BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), > >> - > >> - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), > >> - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), > >> - }, > >> - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", > >> - .result = REJECT, > >> - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, > >> -}, > >> -- > >> 2.30.2 > >> > > . >
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c index 74b1917d4208..515a8222f08f 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bounds.c @@ -777,31 +777,6 @@ .result = ACCEPT, .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, }, -{ - "bound check with JMP_JSLT for crossing 64-bit signed boundary", - .insns = { - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 8), - - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffffffffffff10), - BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), - - BPF_LD_IMM64(BPF_REG_0, 0x8000000000000000), - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), - /* r1 signed range is [S64_MIN, S64_MAX] */ - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), - - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), - }, - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", - .result = REJECT, - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, -}, { "bound check for loop upper bound greater than U32_MAX", .insns = { @@ -849,28 +824,3 @@ .result = ACCEPT, .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, }, -{ - "bound check with JMP32_JSLT for crossing 32-bit signed boundary", - .insns = { - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_2, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data)), - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_W, BPF_REG_3, BPF_REG_1, offsetof(struct xdp_md, data_end)), - BPF_MOV64_REG(BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2), - BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, 1), - BPF_JMP_REG(BPF_JGT, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_3, 6), - - BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_2, 0), - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x7fffff10), - BPF_ALU32_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_0), - - BPF_MOV32_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0x80000000), - BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, 1), - /* r1 signed range is [S32_MIN, S32_MAX] */ - BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JSLT, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, -2), - - BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), - BPF_EXIT_INSN(), - }, - .errstr = "BPF program is too large", - .result = REJECT, - .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP, -},