selftests/bpf: Correct map_fd to data_fd in tailcalls

[ Upstream commit 96daa9874211d5497aa70fa409b67afc29f0cb86 ]

Get and check data_fd. It should not check map_fd again.

Meanwhile, correct some

selftests/bpf: Correct map_fd to data_fd in tailcalls

[ Upstream commit 96daa9874211d5497aa70fa409b67afc29f0cb86 ]

Get and check data_fd. It should not check map_fd again.

Meanwhile, correct some 'return' to 'goto out'.

Thank the suggestion from Maciej in "bpf, x64: Fix tailcall infinite
loop"[0] discussions.

[0] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e496aef8-1f80-0f8e-dcdd-25a8c300319a@gmail.com/T/#m7d3b601066ba66400d436b7e7579b2df4a101033

Fixes: 79d49ba048ec ("bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases")
Fixes: 3b0379111197 ("selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests")
Fixes: 5e0b0a4c52d3 ("selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stack")
Signed-off-by: Leon Hwang <hffilwlqm@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230906154256.95461-1-hffilwlqm@gmail.com
Signed-off-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Store BPF object files with .bpf.o extension

BPF object files are, in a way, the final artifact produced as part of
the ahead-of-time compilation process. That makes them somewhat spe

selftests/bpf: Store BPF object files with .bpf.o extension

BPF object files are, in a way, the final artifact produced as part of
the ahead-of-time compilation process. That makes them somewhat special
compared to "regular" object files, which are a intermediate build
artifacts that can typically be removed safely. As such, it can make
sense to name them differently to make it easier to spot this difference
at a glance.

Among others, libbpf-bootstrap [0] has established the extension .bpf.o
for BPF object files. It seems reasonable to follow this example and
establish the same denomination for selftest build artifacts. To that
end, this change adjusts the corresponding part of the build system and
the test programs loading BPF object files to work with .bpf.o files.

[0] https://github.com/libbpf/libbpf-bootstrap

Suggested-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Müller <deso@posteo.net>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20220901222253.1199242-1-deso@posteo.net

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stack

Cover the case when tail call count needs to be passed from BPF function to
BPF function, and the caller has data on stack. Spec

selftests/bpf: Test tail call counting with bpf2bpf and data on stack

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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Migrate from bpf_prog_test_run

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

selftests/bpf: Migrate from bpf_prog_test_run

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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Stop using bpf_map__def() API

libbpf bpf_map__def() API is being deprecated, replace selftests/bpf's
usage with the appropriate getters and setters.

Signed-off-by: Christy Lee <chris

selftests/bpf: Stop using bpf_map__def() API

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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Use explicit bpf_prog_test_load() calls everywhere

-Dbpf_prog_load_deprecated=bpf_prog_test_load trick is both ugly and
breaks when deprecation goes into effect due to macro magic. Co

selftests/bpf: Use explicit bpf_prog_test_load() calls everywhere

-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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Switch SEC("classifier*") usage to a strict SEC("tc")

Convert all SEC("classifier*") uses to a new and strict SEC("tc")
section name. In reference_tracking selftests switch from ambig

selftests/bpf: Switch SEC("classifier*") usage to a strict SEC("tc")

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

show more ...

bpf, selftests: Replicate tailcall limit test for indirect call case

The tailcall_3 test program uses bpf_tail_call_static() where the JIT
would patch a direct jump. Add a new tailcall_6 test progra

bpf, selftests: Replicate tailcall limit test for indirect call case

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

show more ...

bpf: Selftest to verify mixing bpf2bpf calls and tailcalls with insn patch

This adds some extra noise to the tailcall_bpf2bpf4 tests that will cause
verify to patch insns. This then moves around sub

bpf: Selftest to verify mixing bpf2bpf calls and tailcalls with insn patch

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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests

Add four tests to tailcalls selftest explicitly named
"tailcall_bpf2bpf_X" as their purpose is to validate that combination
of tailcalls with bpf2bpf calls

selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests

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>

show more ...

bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases

Add several BPF kselftest cases for tail calls which test the various
patch directions, and that multiple locations are patched in same and
different p

bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases

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

show more ...

selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests

Add four tests to tailcalls selftest explicitly named
"tailcall_bpf2bpf_X" as their purpose is to validate that combination
of tailcalls wit

selftests/bpf: Add tailcall_bpf2bpf tests

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>

show more ...

bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases

Add several BPF kselftest cases for tail calls which test the various
patch directions, and that multiple locations are patched in same and

bpf, testing: Add various tail call test cases

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

show more ...