From: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
This series has two minor fixes, found when cross-compiling for the
RISC-V architecture.
Some RISC-V systems do not define HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
which made some of tests bail out. Fix the failing tests by adding
F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS.
...and some RISC-V systems *do* define
HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. In this case the autoconf.h was not
correctly picked up by the build system.
Cheers,
Björn
Björn Töpel (2):
selftests/bpf: Add F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS to some tests
selftests/bpf: Honor $(O) when figuring out paths
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 4 ++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c | 1 +
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c | 2 ++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c | 8 ++++++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c | 2 ++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c | 2 +-
6 files changed, 18 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
base-commit: a94098d490e17d652770f2309fcb9b46bc4cf864
--
2.39.2
From: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
Some verifier tests were missing F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
which made the test fail. Add the flag where needed.
Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c | 1 +
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c | 2 ++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c | 8 ++++++++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c | 2 ++
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c | 2 +-
5 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
index b39665f33524..319337bdcfc8 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/atomic_cmpxchg.c
@@ -242,4 +242,5 @@
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "R0 invalid mem access",
.errstr_unpriv = "R10 partial copy of pointer",
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c
index 83cecfbd6739..0b394a7f7a2d 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/ctx_skb.c
@@ -1169,6 +1169,7 @@
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"pkt_end < pkt taken check",
@@ -1190,4 +1191,5 @@
},
.result = ACCEPT,
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_SK_SKB,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c
index 1a27a6210554..43776f6f92f4 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/jmp32.c
@@ -290,6 +290,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jgt32: BPF_K",
@@ -360,6 +361,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jle32: BPF_K",
@@ -430,6 +432,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jlt32: BPF_K",
@@ -500,6 +503,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jsge32: BPF_K",
@@ -570,6 +574,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jsgt32: BPF_K",
@@ -640,6 +645,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jsle32: BPF_K",
@@ -710,6 +716,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jslt32: BPF_K",
@@ -780,6 +787,7 @@
.result_unpriv = REJECT,
.result = ACCEPT,
.retval = 2,
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"jgt32: range bound deduction, reg op imm",
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
index a0cfc06d75bc..d25c3e9605f1 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/map_kptr.c
@@ -68,6 +68,7 @@
.fixup_map_kptr = { 1 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "kptr access cannot have variable offset",
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"map_kptr: bpf_kptr_xchg non-const var_off",
@@ -121,6 +122,7 @@
.fixup_map_kptr = { 1 },
.result = REJECT,
.errstr = "kptr access misaligned expected=0 off=7",
+ .flags = F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
},
{
"map_kptr: reject var_off != 0",
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c
index 99272bb890da..0d84dd1f38b6 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/precise.c
@@ -216,7 +216,7 @@
},
.fixup_map_ringbuf = { 1 },
.prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_XDP,
- .flags = BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ,
+ .flags = BPF_F_TEST_STATE_FREQ | F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
.errstr = "invalid access to memory, mem_size=1 off=42 size=8",
.result = REJECT,
},
--
2.39.2
From: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
When building the kselftests out-of-tree, e.g.
| make ARCH=riscv CROSS_COMPILE=riscv64-linux-gnu- \
| O=/tmp/kselftest headers
| make ARCH=riscv CROSS_COMPILE=riscv64-linux-gnu- \
| O=/tmp/kselftest HOSTCC=gcc FORMAT= \
| SKIP_TARGETS="arm64 ia64 powerpc sparc64 x86 sgx" \
| -C tools/testing/selftests gen_tar
the kselftest build would not pick up the correct GENDIR path, and
therefore not including autoconf.h.
Correct that by taking $(O) into consideration when figuring out the
GENDIR path.
Signed-off-by: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
---
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
index ad6b585e0d7c..daccc1b8573a 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/Makefile
@@ -12,7 +12,11 @@ BPFDIR := $(LIBDIR)/bpf
TOOLSINCDIR := $(TOOLSDIR)/include
BPFTOOLDIR := $(TOOLSDIR)/bpf/bpftool
APIDIR := $(TOOLSINCDIR)/uapi
+ifneq ($(O),)
+GENDIR := $(O)/include/generated
+else
GENDIR := $(abspath ../../../../include/generated)
+endif
GENHDR := $(GENDIR)/autoconf.h
HOSTPKG_CONFIG := pkg-config
--
2.39.2
On 7/5/23 1:39 PM, Björn Töpel wrote:
> From: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
>
> This series has two minor fixes, found when cross-compiling for the
> RISC-V architecture.
>
> Some RISC-V systems do not define HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
> which made some of tests bail out. Fix the failing tests by adding
> F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS.
>
> ...and some RISC-V systems *do* define
> HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. In this case the autoconf.h was not
> correctly picked up by the build system.
Looks good, applied thanks! Any plans on working towards integrating riscv
into upstream BPF CI? Would love to see that happening. :)
Thanks,
Daniel
Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]> writes:
> On 7/5/23 1:39 PM, Björn Töpel wrote:
>> From: Björn Töpel <[email protected]>
>>
>> This series has two minor fixes, found when cross-compiling for the
>> RISC-V architecture.
>>
>> Some RISC-V systems do not define HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS,
>> which made some of tests bail out. Fix the failing tests by adding
>> F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS.
>>
>> ...and some RISC-V systems *do* define
>> HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS. In this case the autoconf.h was not
>> correctly picked up by the build system.
>
> Looks good, applied thanks!
Thank you!
> Any plans on working towards integrating riscv into upstream BPF CI?
> Would love to see that happening. :)
Yes! I started hacking a bit on that some time back:
https://github.com/libbpf/ci/pull/87
https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/pull/194
(TL;DR: I'll continuing that work at some point.)
RISC-V still needs cross-compilation, and testing on qemu/TCG (on
typically x86-hosts), which puts some constraints on the
rootfs/cross-compilation host; For RISC-V Debian Bullseye is way too old
(a lot packages are missing/broken). Typically for BPF it would be
Ubuntu Kinetic (or later), or some Debian Sid snapshot.
The rootfs, the host, and the host foreign arch would need to be the
same for "no-hassle cross-compilation on Debian derivatives" -- and at
least younger than "Ubuntu Kinetic"-age.
AFAIU, there are some issues with rootfs version and build host
versioning for other archs as well: https://github.com/libbpf/ci/pull/83
Björn