From: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
To: Daniel Xu <dxu@dxuuu.xyz>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com>
Cc: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, shuah@kernel.org,
andrii@kernel.org, steffen.klassert@secunet.com,
antony.antony@secunet.com, alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com,
yonghong.song@linux.dev, mykolal@fb.com, martin.lau@linux.dev,
song@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, kpsingh@kernel.org,
sdf@google.com, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, devel@linux-ipsec.org,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec-next v3 5/9] libbpf: selftests: Add verifier tests for CO-RE bitfield writes
Date: Sat, 02 Dec 2023 02:20:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d2fe8b0593a1009305e90d98a8bff984c1314748.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ka2irjz53qjkax545o67mvouyytzqw3dvorqixe2q72crgzjpi@he2uiobuelvd>
On Fri, 2023-12-01 at 17:10 -0700, Daniel Xu wrote:
[...]
> > > +SEC("tc")
> > > +__description("single CO-RE bitfield roundtrip")
> > > +__btf_path("btf__core_reloc_bitfields.bpf.o")
> > > +__success __failure_unpriv
> >
> > do we want __failure_unpriv at all? Is this failure related to
> > *bitfield* logic at all?
>
> Oh, I pre-emptively added it. From the docs, I thought __failure_unpriv
> meant "don't try to load this as an unprivileged used cuz it'll fail".
> And since I used the tc hook, I figured it'd fail.
Actually it means:
"try to load as unprivileged user and expect failure,
report error on successful load".
In general, the meaning of "___xxx" and "___xxx_unpriv" annotations
is identical, except first instructs to run the test in privileged mode,
while second instructs to run test in unprivileged mode:
- if only annotations w/o "*_unpriv" suffix are present the test would
be executed as privileged;
- if only annotations with "*_unpriv" suffix are present the test would
be executed as unprivileged;
- if both kinds of annotations are present the test would be executed
in both modes.
[...]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-12-02 0:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-12-01 20:23 [PATCH ipsec-next v3 0/9] Add bpf_xdp_get_xfrm_state() kfunc Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 1/9] bpf: xfrm: " Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 2/9] bpf: xfrm: Add bpf_xdp_xfrm_state_release() kfunc Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 3/9] libbpf: Add BPF_CORE_WRITE_BITFIELD() macro Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:51 ` [devel-ipsec] " Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 21:22 ` Eduard Zingerman
2023-12-01 23:49 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 0:13 ` Daniel Xu
2023-12-02 0:40 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 4/9] bpf: selftests: test_loader: Support __btf_path() annotation Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 23:50 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 5/9] libbpf: selftests: Add verifier tests for CO-RE bitfield writes Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 23:52 ` Andrii Nakryiko
2023-12-02 0:10 ` Daniel Xu
2023-12-02 0:20 ` Eduard Zingerman [this message]
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 6/9] bpf: selftests: test_tunnel: Setup fresh topology for each subtest Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 7/9] bpf: selftests: test_tunnel: Use vmlinux.h declarations Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 8/9] bpf: selftests: Move xfrm tunnel test to test_progs Daniel Xu
2023-12-01 20:23 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 9/9] bpf: xfrm: Add selftest for bpf_xdp_get_xfrm_state() Daniel Xu
2023-12-02 0:10 ` [PATCH ipsec-next v3 0/9] Add bpf_xdp_get_xfrm_state() kfunc Alexei Starovoitov
2023-12-02 0:16 ` Daniel Xu
2023-12-04 8:25 ` Steffen Klassert
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d2fe8b0593a1009305e90d98a8bff984c1314748.camel@gmail.com \
--to=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii.nakryiko@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=antony.antony@secunet.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=devel@linux-ipsec.org \
--cc=dxu@dxuuu.xyz \
--cc=haoluo@google.com \
--cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kpsingh@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
--cc=mykolal@fb.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sdf@google.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
--cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.com \
--cc=yonghong.song@linux.dev \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®