From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
This patchset contains some fixes and improvements for test_sockmap.
3-5: switching attachments to bpf_link as Jakub suggested in [1]. 1-2, 6-8: Small fixes.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/87zfsiw3a3.fsf@cloudflare.com/
Geliang Tang (8): selftests/bpf: Fix tx_prog_fd values in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate definition of i in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Use bpf_link attachments in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Replace tx_prog_fd with tx_prog in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop prog_fd array in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Fix size of map_fd in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Check length of recv in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate bpf_map_lookup_elem in test_sockmap
.../selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h | 3 - tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 101 +++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The values of tx_prog_fd in run_options() should not be 0, so set it as -1 in else branch, and test it using "if (tx_prog_fd > 0)" condition, not "if (tx_prog_fd)" or "if (tx_prog_fd >= 0)".
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index 4499b3cfc3a6..fde0dd741e69 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -1027,9 +1027,9 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) else if (txmsg_drop) tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[8]; else - tx_prog_fd = 0; + tx_prog_fd = -1;
- if (tx_prog_fd) { + if (tx_prog_fd > 0) { int redir_fd, i = 0;
err = bpf_prog_attach(tx_prog_fd, @@ -1285,7 +1285,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER); bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[2], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT);
- if (tx_prog_fd >= 0) + if (tx_prog_fd > 0) bpf_prog_detach2(tx_prog_fd, map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT);
for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The values of tx_prog_fd in run_options() should not be 0, so set it as -1 in else branch, and test it using "if (tx_prog_fd > 0)" condition, not "if (tx_prog_fd)" or "if (tx_prog_fd >= 0)".
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Acked-by: John Fastabend john.fastabend@gmail.com
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
There's already a definition of i in run_options() at the beginning, no need to define a new one in "if (tx_prog_fd > 0)" block.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index fde0dd741e69..e7dbf49a2ca6 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -1030,7 +1030,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) tx_prog_fd = -1;
if (tx_prog_fd > 0) { - int redir_fd, i = 0; + int redir_fd;
err = bpf_prog_attach(tx_prog_fd, map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT, 0); @@ -1041,6 +1041,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) goto out; }
+ i = 0; err = bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd[1], &i, &c1, BPF_ANY); if (err) { fprintf(stderr,
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
There's already a definition of i in run_options() at the beginning, no need to define a new one in "if (tx_prog_fd > 0)" block.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Acked-by: John Fastabend john.fastabend@gmail.com
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Switch attachments to bpf_link using bpf_program__attach_sockmap() instead of bpf_prog_attach().
This patch adds a new array progs[] to replace prog_fd[] array, set in populate_progs() for each program in bpf object.
And another new array links[] to save the attached bpf_link. It is initalized as NULL in populate_progs, set as the return valuses of bpf_program__attach_sockmap(), and detached by bpf_link__detach().
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 59 ++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index e7dbf49a2ca6..d7581bbbc473 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -64,6 +64,8 @@ int failed; int map_fd[9]; struct bpf_map *maps[9]; int prog_fd[9]; +struct bpf_program *progs[9]; +struct bpf_link *links[9];
int txmsg_pass; int txmsg_redir; @@ -960,43 +962,39 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test)
/* Attach programs to sockmap */ if (!txmsg_omit_skb_parser) { - err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[0], map_fd[0], - BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER, 0); - if (err) { + links[0] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[0], map_fd[0]); + if (!links[0]) { fprintf(stderr, - "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (sockmap %i->%i): %d (%s)\n", - prog_fd[0], map_fd[0], err, strerror(errno)); - return err; + "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (sockmap %i->%i): (%s)\n", + bpf_program__fd(progs[0]), map_fd[0], strerror(errno)); + return -1; } }
- err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[1], map_fd[0], - BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT, 0); - if (err) { - fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (sockmap): %d (%s)\n", - err, strerror(errno)); - return err; + links[1] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[1], map_fd[0]); + if (!links[1]) { + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (sockmap): (%s)\n", + strerror(errno)); + return -1; }
/* Attach programs to TLS sockmap */ if (txmsg_ktls_skb) { if (!txmsg_omit_skb_parser) { - err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], - BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER, 0); - if (err) { + links[2] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[0], map_fd[8]); + if (!links[2]) { fprintf(stderr, - "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (TLS sockmap %i->%i): %d (%s)\n", - prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], err, strerror(errno)); - return err; + "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (TLS sockmap %i->%i): (%s)\n", + bpf_program__fd(progs[0]), map_fd[8], strerror(errno)); + return -1; } }
- err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[2], map_fd[8], - BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT, 0); - if (err) { - fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (TLS sockmap): %d (%s)\n", - err, strerror(errno)); - return err; + links[3] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[2], map_fd[8]); + if (!links[3]) { + fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (TLS sockmap): (%s)\n", + strerror(errno)); + return -1; } }
@@ -1281,10 +1279,11 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) out: /* Detatch and zero all the maps */ bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[3], cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS); - bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[0], map_fd[0], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER); - bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[1], map_fd[0], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT); - bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER); - bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[2], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT); + + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(links); i++) { + if (links[i]) + bpf_link__detach(links[i]); + }
if (tx_prog_fd > 0) bpf_prog_detach2(tx_prog_fd, map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT); @@ -1836,6 +1835,7 @@ static int populate_progs(char *bpf_file) i = bpf_object__load(obj); i = 0; bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) { + progs[i] = prog; prog_fd[i] = bpf_program__fd(prog); i++; } @@ -1850,6 +1850,9 @@ static int populate_progs(char *bpf_file) } }
+ for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(links); i++) + links[i] = NULL; + return 0; }
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Switch attachments to bpf_link using bpf_program__attach_sockmap() instead of bpf_prog_attach().
Sorry it took me a few days to get to this.
Is there a reason to push this to links vs just leave it as is? I had a plan to port all the test_sockmap tests into prog_tests anyways. I'll try to push some initial patch next week.
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
Thanks, John
This patch adds a new array progs[] to replace prog_fd[] array, set in populate_progs() for each program in bpf object.
And another new array links[] to save the attached bpf_link. It is initalized as NULL in populate_progs, set as the return valuses of bpf_program__attach_sockmap(), and detached by bpf_link__detach().
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 59 ++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 31 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index e7dbf49a2ca6..d7581bbbc473 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -64,6 +64,8 @@ int failed; int map_fd[9]; struct bpf_map *maps[9]; int prog_fd[9]; +struct bpf_program *progs[9]; +struct bpf_link *links[9]; int txmsg_pass; int txmsg_redir; @@ -960,43 +962,39 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) /* Attach programs to sockmap */ if (!txmsg_omit_skb_parser) {
err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[0], map_fd[0],BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER, 0);if (err) {
links[0] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[0], map_fd[0]);if (!links[0]) { fprintf(stderr,
"ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (sockmap %i->%i): %d (%s)\n",prog_fd[0], map_fd[0], err, strerror(errno));return err;
"ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (sockmap %i->%i): (%s)\n",bpf_program__fd(progs[0]), map_fd[0], strerror(errno));return -1;
- err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[1], map_fd[0],
BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT, 0);- if (err) {
fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (sockmap): %d (%s)\n",err, strerror(errno));return err;
- links[1] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[1], map_fd[0]);
- if (!links[1]) {
fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (sockmap): (%s)\n",strerror(errno));return -1;/* Attach programs to TLS sockmap */ if (txmsg_ktls_skb) { if (!txmsg_omit_skb_parser) {
err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[0], map_fd[8],BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER, 0);if (err) {
links[2] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[0], map_fd[8]);if (!links[2]) { fprintf(stderr,
"ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (TLS sockmap %i->%i): %d (%s)\n",prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], err, strerror(errno));return err;
"ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (TLS sockmap %i->%i): (%s)\n",bpf_program__fd(progs[0]), map_fd[8], strerror(errno));return -1; }
err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[2], map_fd[8],BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT, 0);if (err) {fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (TLS sockmap): %d (%s)\n",err, strerror(errno));return err;
links[3] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(progs[2], map_fd[8]);if (!links[3]) {fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (TLS sockmap): (%s)\n",strerror(errno));return -1;@@ -1281,10 +1279,11 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) out: /* Detatch and zero all the maps */ bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[3], cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS);
- bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[0], map_fd[0], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER);
- bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[1], map_fd[0], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT);
- bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[0], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_PARSER);
- bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[2], map_fd[8], BPF_SK_SKB_STREAM_VERDICT);
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(links); i++) {
if (links[i])bpf_link__detach(links[i]);- }
if (tx_prog_fd > 0) bpf_prog_detach2(tx_prog_fd, map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT); @@ -1836,6 +1835,7 @@ static int populate_progs(char *bpf_file) i = bpf_object__load(obj); i = 0; bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) {
progs[i] = prog;@@ -1850,6 +1850,9 @@ static int populate_progs(char *bpf_file) } }
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(links); i++)
links[i] = NULL;- return 0;
} -- 2.43.0
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:12 AM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Switch attachments to bpf_link using bpf_program__attach_sockmap() instead of bpf_prog_attach().
Sorry it took me a few days to get to this.
Is there a reason to push this to links vs just leave it as is? I had a plan to port all the test_sockmap tests into prog_tests anyways. I'll try to push some initial patch next week.
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
It was me who suggested the switch to bpf_link in reaction to a series of cleanups to prog_type and prog_attach_type submitted by Geliang.
Relevant threads:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/9c10d9f974f07fcb354a43a8eca67acb2fafc587.1715926... https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240522080936.2475833-1-jakub@cloudflare.com https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e27d7d0c1e0e79b0acd22ac6ad5d8f9f00225303.1716372...
I thought bpf_links added more value than cleaning up "old style" attachments.
On Mon, 2024-05-27 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:12 AM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Switch attachments to bpf_link using bpf_program__attach_sockmap() instead of bpf_prog_attach().
Sorry it took me a few days to get to this.
Is there a reason to push this to links vs just leave it as is? I had a plan to port all the test_sockmap tests into prog_tests anyways. I'll try to push some initial patch next week.
Great, I strongly agree with porting them into prog_tests. I am also willing to participate in implementing this plan together.
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
It was me who suggested the switch to bpf_link in reaction to a series of cleanups to prog_type and prog_attach_type submitted by Geliang.
Yes, patches 3-5 address Jakub's suggestion: switching attachments to bpf_link.
Relevant threads:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/9c10d9f974f07fcb354a43a8eca67acb2fafc587.1715926... https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240522080936.2475833-1-jakub@cloudflare.com https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e27d7d0c1e0e79b0acd22ac6ad5d8f9f00225303.1716372...
I thought bpf_links added more value than cleaning up "old style" attachments.
Other patches 1-2, 6-8 are small fixes which I found while trying to solve the NONBLOCK issue [1]. Yes, I haven't given up on solving this issue yet. I think it must be solved, since there is a bug somewhere. WDYT?
[1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/patch/b67101632c6858d281f105b...
Thanks, -Geliang
Geliang Tang wrote:
On Mon, 2024-05-27 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:12 AM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
Switch attachments to bpf_link using bpf_program__attach_sockmap() instead of bpf_prog_attach().
Sorry it took me a few days to get to this.
Is there a reason to push this to links vs just leave it as is? I had a plan to port all the test_sockmap tests into prog_tests anyways. I'll try to push some initial patch next week.
Great, I strongly agree with porting them into prog_tests. I am also willing to participate in implementing this plan together.
I have a first patch that starts to move things I'll dig it up here. Still a bit behind on everything as you see its Thr already.
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
It was me who suggested the switch to bpf_link in reaction to a series of cleanups to prog_type and prog_attach_type submitted by Geliang.
Yes, patches 3-5 address Jakub's suggestion: switching attachments to bpf_link.
OK. Lets just take them the series lgtm. Jakub any other comments?
Relevant threads:
https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/9c10d9f974f07fcb354a43a8eca67acb2fafc587.1715926... https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20240522080936.2475833-1-jakub@cloudflare.com https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/e27d7d0c1e0e79b0acd22ac6ad5d8f9f00225303.1716372...
I thought bpf_links added more value than cleaning up "old style" attachments.
Other patches 1-2, 6-8 are small fixes which I found while trying to solve the NONBLOCK issue [1]. Yes, I haven't given up on solving this issue yet. I think it must be solved, since there is a bug somewhere. WDYT?
Yes I think this is an actual issue with the stream parser waking up sockets before the data is copied into the recv buffers.
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 04:45 PM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
On Mon, 2024-05-27 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:12 AM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
[...]
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
It was me who suggested the switch to bpf_link in reaction to a series of cleanups to prog_type and prog_attach_type submitted by Geliang.
Yes, patches 3-5 address Jakub's suggestion: switching attachments to bpf_link.
OK. Lets just take them the series lgtm. Jakub any other comments?
Gave it a run - all looks well. Thanks for the patches.
Geliang, is there some MPTCP+sockmap use-case you're working towards?
On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 01:13:39PM +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 04:45 PM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
On Mon, 2024-05-27 at 21:36 +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 10:12 AM -07, John Fastabend wrote:
Geliang Tang wrote:
[...]
The one advantage of test_sockmap is we can have it run for longer runs by pushing different options through so might be worth keeping just for that.
If you really want links here I'm OK with that I guess just asking.
It was me who suggested the switch to bpf_link in reaction to a series of cleanups to prog_type and prog_attach_type submitted by Geliang.
Yes, patches 3-5 address Jakub's suggestion: switching attachments to bpf_link.
OK. Lets just take them the series lgtm. Jakub any other comments?
Gave it a run - all looks well. Thanks for the patches.
Geliang, is there some MPTCP+sockmap use-case you're working towards?
Yes, indeed. I have been working on a task related to MPTCP+sockmap recently, at least related to this test_sockmap.c selftest. We recently received an issue with MPTCP [1], that is TLS cannot be set on MPTCP sockets. The reason is that both MPTCP and TLS are implemented on TCP ULP. And each socket only supports one type of TCP ULP.
I simply modified this test_sockmap.c selftest to support MPTCP, so that it can be used as the first version of test for MPTCP+TLS. So I spent some time reading and debugging this test.
The development of MPTCP+TLS is still ongoing, and currently only setsockopt part has been successfully supported. The idea is simple, use an array of tcp_ulp_ops in a socket, instead of a single one:
struct inet_connection_sock { ... ... const struct tcp_ulp_ops *icsk_ulp_ops[ULP_INDEX_MAX]; void __rcu *icsk_ulp_data[ULP_INDEX_MAX]; }
The entire patch is in my commit "mptcp: tls support" [2]. It's not finish yet, but I really want to hear your opinions, especially John's.
[1] https://github.com/multipath-tcp/mptcp_net-next/issues/480 [2] https://github.com/geliangtang/mptcp_net-next/commit/bba00a6cde75bab5a2c1c19...
Thanks, -Geliang
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
bpf_program__attach_sockmap() needs to take a parameter of type bpf_program instead of an fd, so tx_prog_fd becomes useless. This patch uses a pointer tx_prog to point to an item in progs[] array.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 30 ++++++++++------------ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index d7581bbbc473..8e32d157bac0 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -954,7 +954,8 @@ enum {
static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) { - int i, key, next_key, err, tx_prog_fd = -1, zero = 0; + int i, key, next_key, err, zero = 0; + struct bpf_program *tx_prog;
/* If base test skip BPF setup */ if (test == BASE || test == BASE_SENDPAGE) @@ -1015,27 +1016,27 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test)
/* Attach txmsg program to sockmap */ if (txmsg_pass) - tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[4]; + tx_prog = progs[4]; else if (txmsg_redir) - tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[5]; + tx_prog = progs[5]; else if (txmsg_apply) - tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[6]; + tx_prog = progs[6]; else if (txmsg_cork) - tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[7]; + tx_prog = progs[7]; else if (txmsg_drop) - tx_prog_fd = prog_fd[8]; + tx_prog = progs[8]; else - tx_prog_fd = -1; + tx_prog = NULL;
- if (tx_prog_fd > 0) { + if (tx_prog) { int redir_fd;
- err = bpf_prog_attach(tx_prog_fd, - map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT, 0); - if (err) { + links[4] = bpf_program__attach_sockmap(tx_prog, map_fd[1]); + if (!links[4]) { fprintf(stderr, - "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (txmsg): %d (%s)\n", - err, strerror(errno)); + "ERROR: bpf_program__attach_sockmap (txmsg): (%s)\n", + strerror(errno)); + err = -1; goto out; }
@@ -1285,9 +1286,6 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) bpf_link__detach(links[i]); }
- if (tx_prog_fd > 0) - bpf_prog_detach2(tx_prog_fd, map_fd[1], BPF_SK_MSG_VERDICT); - for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) { key = next_key = 0; bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd[i], &key, &zero, BPF_ANY);
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The program fds can be got by using bpf_program__fd(progs[]), then prog_fd becomes useless. This patch drops it.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 6 ++---- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index 8e32d157bac0..e83ca0005721 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -63,7 +63,6 @@ int passed; int failed; int map_fd[9]; struct bpf_map *maps[9]; -int prog_fd[9]; struct bpf_program *progs[9]; struct bpf_link *links[9];
@@ -1000,7 +999,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) }
/* Attach to cgroups */ - err = bpf_prog_attach(prog_fd[3], cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS, 0); + err = bpf_prog_attach(bpf_program__fd(progs[3]), cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS, 0); if (err) { fprintf(stderr, "ERROR: bpf_prog_attach (groups): %d (%s)\n", err, strerror(errno)); @@ -1279,7 +1278,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) fprintf(stderr, "unknown test\n"); out: /* Detatch and zero all the maps */ - bpf_prog_detach2(prog_fd[3], cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS); + bpf_prog_detach2(bpf_program__fd(progs[3]), cg_fd, BPF_CGROUP_SOCK_OPS);
for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(links); i++) { if (links[i]) @@ -1834,7 +1833,6 @@ static int populate_progs(char *bpf_file) i = 0; bpf_object__for_each_program(prog, obj) { progs[i] = prog; - prog_fd[i] = bpf_program__fd(prog); i++; }
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The array size of map_fd[] is 9, not 8. This patch changes it as a more general form: ARRAY_SIZE(map_fd).
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index e83ca0005721..3654babfac59 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -1285,7 +1285,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) bpf_link__detach(links[i]); }
- for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) { + for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(map_fd); i++) { key = next_key = 0; bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd[i], &key, &zero, BPF_ANY); while (bpf_map_get_next_key(map_fd[i], &key, &next_key) == 0) {
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The array size of map_fd[] is 9, not 8. This patch changes it as a more general form: ARRAY_SIZE(map_fd).
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index e83ca0005721..3654babfac59 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -1285,7 +1285,7 @@ static int run_options(struct sockmap_options *options, int cg_fd, int test) bpf_link__detach(links[i]); }
- for (i = 0; i < 8; i++) {
- for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(map_fd); i++) { key = next_key = 0; bpf_map_update_elem(map_fd[i], &key, &zero, BPF_ANY); while (bpf_map_get_next_key(map_fd[i], &key, &next_key) == 0) {
-- 2.43.0
Acked-by: John Fastabend john.fastabend@gmail.com
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The value of recv in msg_loop may be negative, like EWOULDBLOCK, so it's necessary to check if it is positive before accumulating it to bytes_recvd.
Fixes: 16962b2404ac ("bpf: sockmap, add selftests") Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index 3654babfac59..4c7cb206b31d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -681,7 +681,8 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt, } }
- s->bytes_recvd += recv; + if (recv > 0) + s->bytes_recvd += recv;
if (opt->check_recved_len && s->bytes_recvd > total_bytes) { errno = EMSGSIZE;
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
The value of recv in msg_loop may be negative, like EWOULDBLOCK, so it's necessary to check if it is positive before accumulating it to bytes_recvd.
Fixes: 16962b2404ac ("bpf: sockmap, add selftests") Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c index 3654babfac59..4c7cb206b31d 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c @@ -681,7 +681,8 @@ static int msg_loop(int fd, int iov_count, int iov_length, int cnt, } }
s->bytes_recvd += recv;
if (recv > 0)s->bytes_recvd += recv;if (opt->check_recved_len && s->bytes_recvd > total_bytes) { errno = EMSGSIZE; -- 2.43.0
Acked-by: John Fastabend john.fastabend@gmail.com
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
bpf_map_lookup_elem is invoked in bpf_prog3() already, no need to invoke it again. This patch drops it.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h index 99d2ea9fb658..2399958991e7 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h @@ -177,9 +177,6 @@ int bpf_prog3(struct __sk_buff *skb) return bpf_sk_redirect_hash(skb, &tls_sock_map, &ret, flags); #endif } - f = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&sock_skb_opts, &one); - if (f && *f) - ret = SK_DROP; err = bpf_skb_adjust_room(skb, 4, 0, 0); if (err) return SK_DROP;
Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
bpf_map_lookup_elem is invoked in bpf_prog3() already, no need to invoke it again. This patch drops it.
Signed-off-by: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h | 3 --- 1 file changed, 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h index 99d2ea9fb658..2399958991e7 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h @@ -177,9 +177,6 @@ int bpf_prog3(struct __sk_buff *skb) return bpf_sk_redirect_hash(skb, &tls_sock_map, &ret, flags); #endif }
- f = bpf_map_lookup_elem(&sock_skb_opts, &one);
- if (f && *f)
ret = SK_DROP;-- 2.43.0
Acked-by: John Fastabend john.fastabend@gmail.com
On Thu, May 23, 2024 at 02:49 PM +08, Geliang Tang wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
This patchset contains some fixes and improvements for test_sockmap.
3-5: switching attachments to bpf_link as Jakub suggested in [1]. 1-2, 6-8: Small fixes.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/87zfsiw3a3.fsf@cloudflare.com/
Geliang Tang (8): selftests/bpf: Fix tx_prog_fd values in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate definition of i in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Use bpf_link attachments in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Replace tx_prog_fd with tx_prog in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop prog_fd array in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Fix size of map_fd in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Check length of recv in test_sockmap selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate bpf_map_lookup_elem in test_sockmap
.../selftests/bpf/progs/test_sockmap_kern.h | 3 - tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_sockmap.c | 101 +++++++++--------- 2 files changed, 51 insertions(+), 53 deletions(-)
Tested-by: Jakub Sitnicki jakub@cloudflare.com
Hello:
This series was applied to bpf/bpf-next.git (master) by Daniel Borkmann daniel@iogearbox.net:
On Thu, 23 May 2024 14:49:56 +0800 you wrote:
From: Geliang Tang tanggeliang@kylinos.cn
This patchset contains some fixes and improvements for test_sockmap.
3-5: switching attachments to bpf_link as Jakub suggested in [1]. 1-2, 6-8: Small fixes.
[...]
Here is the summary with links: - [bpf-next,1/8] selftests/bpf: Fix tx_prog_fd values in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/d95ba15b9784 - [bpf-next,2/8] selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate definition of i in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/a9f0ea175948 - [bpf-next,3/8] selftests/bpf: Use bpf_link attachments in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/3f32a115f61d - [bpf-next,4/8] selftests/bpf: Replace tx_prog_fd with tx_prog in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/24bb90a42633 - [bpf-next,5/8] selftests/bpf: Drop prog_fd array in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/467a0c79b551 - [bpf-next,6/8] selftests/bpf: Fix size of map_fd in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/dcb681b659f2 - [bpf-next,7/8] selftests/bpf: Check length of recv in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/de1b5ea789dc - [bpf-next,8/8] selftests/bpf: Drop duplicate bpf_map_lookup_elem in test_sockmap https://git.kernel.org/bpf/bpf-next/c/49784c797932
You are awesome, thank you!
linux-kselftest-mirror@lists.linaro.org
-
Geliang Tang -
Jakub Sitnicki -
John Fastabend -
patchwork-bot+netdevbpf＠kernel.org