From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831D1C43334 for ; Fri, 17 Jun 2022 03:59:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232383AbiFQD7Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:59:16 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54138 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1379395AbiFQD7N (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 23:59:13 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x52e.google.com (mail-pg1-x52e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::52e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25E8D66688; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x52e.google.com with SMTP id 184so2996666pga.12; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=0W/HagJonywK7ZJ69fI6hX0gZNSYy1J0766XYUBnWpk=; b=Nvg1C8j395PzqVMZnx7Pj7fKKRISIC9UVVzrpnpRJTkWrg/GeiXEoHYLleP8PgtdO3 ue0ZDjtp9W4ASVbp+E2+uL8kpw9jDv6oT5cqQDt1HQfKY8QUNNC1pA3xeCMjGRQKJv/a xMgxd7N9YDtp65T23zwrOpasD8RV3eunaCc5Iunf7nFnnnuCZjivH01djAnKKCyM3Mmm mZbSZ2BqtLWnSIApdds3cMEMtK+pXGWVM3uZyOQmVoOlRJ9x84nYFC1GrkSd2fB+DaUg 6Z0cpc8VJete8mRvSkx4IQH+xf7V15Ec1TI2DQ5mUpb8MKF5OP3nl2BIaT+CK7MLAtCU RHLw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=0W/HagJonywK7ZJ69fI6hX0gZNSYy1J0766XYUBnWpk=; b=oteqYV5z5Bx7N1fMbLiYDGcN6Ltm3yl2rBocursT6I7ixBS6YrHqISJ6++Gefv3GS6 47NyvQKYX58IIVn93NzXFbkKsShXxnqHG4R54GNvQa2KnHnxbl0QmiFZwQdqY4J0jJmy P/g2cN07kTgI7BTiFjAEw7DtYUGCckFm6GEXnjmCeCdOas7MVjJwIKjPl4DeXT/2xlSu i0gRFcoFR1Ay/l0wWzkObG07I1kshDKlENvNJj72q4rYVhMN+SXcnrsY11fCrM6k0bXN n/WVHkw9wbUlbRVHw/Kz0K3YMEldOfGCOAZXtCBSTeFBteqydtBViVImLCz2biabGFZx Lgfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8f5wOP0DWwIbL1GiAQDfm3Tq1iW34K7s/qLJPDEsy6IUatJ+vX 99vEGB7U7z4PGzWhgup4+H8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vVl/dKUvpt/f8eeQsaxDmxmSSgcVkCHsMH8j6ipARrJnfgTrUyJ/gnAnfCrqd0Dt9fJRq5nw== X-Received: by 2002:a63:3e0b:0:b0:40c:42db:6601 with SMTP id l11-20020a633e0b000000b0040c42db6601mr3050057pga.586.1655438351515; Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from MacBook-Pro-3.local ([2620:10d:c090:400::5:29cb]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u11-20020a170902e80b00b0016a0858b25dsm39168plg.152.2022.06.16.20.59.09 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2022 20:59:08 -0700 From: Alexei Starovoitov To: Roberto Sassu Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, andrii@kernel.org, kpsingh@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, songliubraving@fb.com, kafai@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RESEND][PATCH v4 4/4] selftests/bpf: Add test for bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature() helper Message-ID: <20220617035908.iw4426f3h4ecpvvp@MacBook-Pro-3.local> References: <20220614130621.1976089-1-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> <20220614130621.1976089-5-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220614130621.1976089-5-roberto.sassu@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 03:06:21PM +0200, Roberto Sassu wrote: > + > + if (child_pid == 0) { > + snprintf(path, sizeof(path), "%s/signing_key.pem", tmp_dir); > + > + return execlp("./sign-file", "./sign-file", "sha256", > + path, path, signed_file_template, NULL); Please use sign_only option, so it saves the signature and doesn't do 'struct module_signature' append. Parsing of that is unnecessary for the purpose of the helper. Checking MODULE_SIG_STRING is unnecessary, etc, etc. Long term we won't be following mod sig approach anyway. bpf maps and progs will have a different format. > + } > + > + waitpid(child_pid, &child_status, 0); > + > + ret = WEXITSTATUS(child_status); > + if (ret) > + goto out; > + > + ret = stat(signed_file_template, &st); > + if (ret == -1) { > + ret = -errno; > + goto out; > + } > + > + if (st.st_size > sizeof(data_item->payload) - sizeof(u32)) { > + ret = -EINVAL; > + goto out; > + } > + > + *(u32 *)data_item->payload = __cpu_to_be32(st.st_size); > + > + fd = open(signed_file_template, O_RDONLY); > + if (fd == -1) { > + ret = -errno; > + goto out; > + } > + > + ret = read(fd, data_item->payload + sizeof(u32), st.st_size); > + > + close(fd); > + > + if (ret != st.st_size) { > + ret = -EIO; > + goto out; > + } > + > + ret = 0; > +out: > + unlink(signed_file_template); > + return ret; > +} > + > +void test_verify_pkcs7_sig(void) > +{ > + char tmp_dir_template[] = "/tmp/verify_sigXXXXXX"; > + char *tmp_dir; > + char *buf = NULL; > + struct test_verify_pkcs7_sig *skel = NULL; > + struct bpf_map *map; > + struct data data; > + u32 saved_len; > + int ret, zero = 0; > + > + LIBBPF_OPTS(bpf_object_open_opts, opts); > + > + /* Trigger creation of session keyring. */ > + syscall(__NR_request_key, "keyring", "_uid.0", NULL, > + KEY_SPEC_SESSION_KEYRING); My understanding that user space can receive a specific id here. It should pass it to bpf prog via global variable and prog should use that id instead of max_ulong hack.