hollalinux
/
linux-sg2042
mirror of https://github.com/sophgo/linux-riscv.git
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

selftests/bpf: fix test_align liveliness expectations 

Commit 2589726d12 ("bpf: introduce bounded loops") caused a change
in the way some registers liveliness is reported in the test_align.
Add missing "_w" to a couple of tests. Note, there are no offset
changes!

Fixes: 2589726d12 ("bpf: introduce bounded loops")
Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
This commit is contained in:
Stanislav Fomichev 2019-07-03 14:29:07 -07:00 committed by Daniel Borkmann
parent 46dd3d7d28
commit d6dbce8fdd
1 changed files with 8 additions and 8 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

16
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c
View File

@ -180,7 +180,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
},
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SCHED_CLS,
.matches = {
{7, "R0=pkt(id=0,off=8,r=8,imm=0)"},
{7, "R0_w=pkt(id=0,off=8,r=8,imm=0)"},
{7, "R3_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=255,var_off=(0x0; 0xff))"},
{8, "R3_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=510,var_off=(0x0; 0x1fe))"},
{9, "R3_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1020,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fc))"},
@ -315,7 +315,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
/* Calculated offset in R6 has unknown value, but known
* alignment of 4.
*/
{8, "R2=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{8, "R2_w=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{8, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1020,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fc))"},
/* Offset is added to packet pointer R5, resulting in
* known fixed offset, and variable offset from R6.
@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
/* Calculated offset in R6 has unknown value, but known
* alignment of 4.
*/
{8, "R2=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{8, "R2_w=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{8, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1020,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fc))"},
/* Adding 14 makes R6 be (4n+2) */
{9, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"},
@ -473,12 +473,12 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
/* (4n) + 14 == (4n+2). We blow our bounds, because
* the add could overflow.
*/
{7, "R5=inv(id=0,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc))"},
{7, "R5_w=inv(id=0,var_off=(0x2; 0xfffffffffffffffc))"},
/* Checked s>=0 */
{9, "R5=inv(id=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
/* packet pointer + nonnegative (4n+2) */
{11, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
{13, "R4=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
{13, "R4_w=pkt(id=1,off=4,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
/* NET_IP_ALIGN + (4n+2) == (4n), alignment is fine.
* We checked the bounds, but it might have been able
* to overflow if the packet pointer started in the
@ -486,7 +486,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
* So we did not get a 'range' on R6, and the access
* attempt will fail.
*/
{15, "R6=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
{15, "R6_w=pkt(id=1,off=0,r=0,umin_value=2,umax_value=9223372036854775806,var_off=(0x2; 0x7ffffffffffffffc))"},
}
},
{
@ -521,7 +521,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
/* Calculated offset in R6 has unknown value, but known
* alignment of 4.
*/
{7, "R2=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{7, "R2_w=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{9, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=1020,var_off=(0x0; 0x3fc))"},
/* Adding 14 makes R6 be (4n+2) */
{10, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=1034,var_off=(0x2; 0x7fc))"},
@ -574,7 +574,7 @@ static struct bpf_align_test tests[] = {
/* Calculated offset in R6 has unknown value, but known
* alignment of 4.
*/
{7, "R2=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{7, "R2_w=pkt(id=0,off=0,r=8,imm=0)"},
{10, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umax_value=60,var_off=(0x0; 0x3c))"},
/* Adding 14 makes R6 be (4n+2) */
{11, "R6_w=inv(id=0,umin_value=14,umax_value=74,var_off=(0x2; 0x7c))"},