Searched hist:"215249 f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad" (Results 1 – 5 of 5) sorted by relevance
| /openbmc/linux/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/ |
| H A D | rbtree_btf_fail__add_wrong_type.c | 215249f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad Mon Feb 13 18:40:16 CST 2023 Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> selftests/bpf: Add rbtree selftests
This patch adds selftests exercising the logic changed/added in the
previous patches in the series. A variety of successful and unsuccessful
rbtree usages are validated:
Success:
* Add some nodes, let map_value bpf_rbtree_root destructor clean them
up
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref leftover by
successful rbtree_add() call
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref returned by
rbtree_first() call
Failure:
* BTF where bpf_rb_root owns bpf_list_node should fail to load
* BTF where node of type X is added to tree containing nodes of type Y
should fail to load
* No calling rbtree api functions in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No releasing lock in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No removing a node which hasn't been added to any tree
* No adding a node which has already been added to a tree
* No escaping of non-owning references past their lock's
critical section
* No escaping of non-owning references past other invalidation points
(rbtree_remove)
These tests mostly focus on rbtree-specific additions, but some of the
failure cases revalidate scenarios common to both linked_list and rbtree
which are covered in the former's tests. Better to be a bit redundant in
case linked_list and rbtree semantics deviate over time.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214004017.2534011-8-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|
| H A D | rbtree_btf_fail__wrong_node_type.c | 215249f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad Mon Feb 13 18:40:16 CST 2023 Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> selftests/bpf: Add rbtree selftests
This patch adds selftests exercising the logic changed/added in the
previous patches in the series. A variety of successful and unsuccessful
rbtree usages are validated:
Success:
* Add some nodes, let map_value bpf_rbtree_root destructor clean them
up
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref leftover by
successful rbtree_add() call
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref returned by
rbtree_first() call
Failure:
* BTF where bpf_rb_root owns bpf_list_node should fail to load
* BTF where node of type X is added to tree containing nodes of type Y
should fail to load
* No calling rbtree api functions in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No releasing lock in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No removing a node which hasn't been added to any tree
* No adding a node which has already been added to a tree
* No escaping of non-owning references past their lock's
critical section
* No escaping of non-owning references past other invalidation points
(rbtree_remove)
These tests mostly focus on rbtree-specific additions, but some of the
failure cases revalidate scenarios common to both linked_list and rbtree
which are covered in the former's tests. Better to be a bit redundant in
case linked_list and rbtree semantics deviate over time.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214004017.2534011-8-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|
| H A D | rbtree.c | 215249f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad Mon Feb 13 18:40:16 CST 2023 Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> selftests/bpf: Add rbtree selftests
This patch adds selftests exercising the logic changed/added in the
previous patches in the series. A variety of successful and unsuccessful
rbtree usages are validated:
Success:
* Add some nodes, let map_value bpf_rbtree_root destructor clean them
up
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref leftover by
successful rbtree_add() call
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref returned by
rbtree_first() call
Failure:
* BTF where bpf_rb_root owns bpf_list_node should fail to load
* BTF where node of type X is added to tree containing nodes of type Y
should fail to load
* No calling rbtree api functions in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No releasing lock in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No removing a node which hasn't been added to any tree
* No adding a node which has already been added to a tree
* No escaping of non-owning references past their lock's
critical section
* No escaping of non-owning references past other invalidation points
(rbtree_remove)
These tests mostly focus on rbtree-specific additions, but some of the
failure cases revalidate scenarios common to both linked_list and rbtree
which are covered in the former's tests. Better to be a bit redundant in
case linked_list and rbtree semantics deviate over time.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214004017.2534011-8-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|
| H A D | rbtree_fail.c | 215249f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad Mon Feb 13 18:40:16 CST 2023 Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> selftests/bpf: Add rbtree selftests
This patch adds selftests exercising the logic changed/added in the
previous patches in the series. A variety of successful and unsuccessful
rbtree usages are validated:
Success:
* Add some nodes, let map_value bpf_rbtree_root destructor clean them
up
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref leftover by
successful rbtree_add() call
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref returned by
rbtree_first() call
Failure:
* BTF where bpf_rb_root owns bpf_list_node should fail to load
* BTF where node of type X is added to tree containing nodes of type Y
should fail to load
* No calling rbtree api functions in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No releasing lock in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No removing a node which hasn't been added to any tree
* No adding a node which has already been added to a tree
* No escaping of non-owning references past their lock's
critical section
* No escaping of non-owning references past other invalidation points
(rbtree_remove)
These tests mostly focus on rbtree-specific additions, but some of the
failure cases revalidate scenarios common to both linked_list and rbtree
which are covered in the former's tests. Better to be a bit redundant in
case linked_list and rbtree semantics deviate over time.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214004017.2534011-8-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|
| /openbmc/linux/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ |
| H A D | rbtree.c | 215249f6adc0359e3546829e7ee622b5e309b0ad Mon Feb 13 18:40:16 CST 2023 Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com> selftests/bpf: Add rbtree selftests
This patch adds selftests exercising the logic changed/added in the
previous patches in the series. A variety of successful and unsuccessful
rbtree usages are validated:
Success:
* Add some nodes, let map_value bpf_rbtree_root destructor clean them
up
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref leftover by
successful rbtree_add() call
* Add some nodes, remove one using the non-owning ref returned by
rbtree_first() call
Failure:
* BTF where bpf_rb_root owns bpf_list_node should fail to load
* BTF where node of type X is added to tree containing nodes of type Y
should fail to load
* No calling rbtree api functions in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No releasing lock in 'less' callback for rbtree_add
* No removing a node which hasn't been added to any tree
* No adding a node which has already been added to a tree
* No escaping of non-owning references past their lock's
critical section
* No escaping of non-owning references past other invalidation points
(rbtree_remove)
These tests mostly focus on rbtree-specific additions, but some of the
failure cases revalidate scenarios common to both linked_list and rbtree
which are covered in the former's tests. Better to be a bit redundant in
case linked_list and rbtree semantics deviate over time.
Signed-off-by: Dave Marchevsky <davemarchevsky@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230214004017.2534011-8-davemarchevsky@fb.com
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
|