Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAP01T74L7C+F7oiBx3fL9SahdvU-9rHpQ=GaLTj0XAfeOKaXrA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20220907145939.489784-1-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220907145939.489784-1-roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
From:   Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 7 Sep 2022 18:02:51 +0200
Message-ID: <CAP01T77rgLz-ApBoXfegLCmensukK59-9=jh2CmuWsC0VVMzWw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v17 12/12] selftests/bpf: Add tests for dynamic pointers
 parameters in kfuncs
To:     Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com>
Cc:     andrii@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
        daniel@iogearbox.net, deso@posteo.net, dhowells@redhat.com,
        haoluo@google.com, jarkko@kernel.org, jmorris@namei.org,
        john.fastabend@gmail.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
        keyrings@vger.kernel.org, kpsingh@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev,
        mingo@redhat.com, mykolal@fb.com, paul@paul-moore.com,
        roberto.sassu@huawei.com, rostedt@goodmis.org, sdf@google.com,
        serge@hallyn.com, shuah@kernel.org, song@kernel.org, yhs@fb.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 7 Sept 2022 at 17:00, Roberto Sassu
<roberto.sassu@huaweicloud.com> wrote:
>
> From: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
>
> Add tests to ensure that only supported dynamic pointer types are accepted,
> that the passed argument is actually a dynamic pointer, that the passed
> argument is a pointer to the stack, and that bpf_verify_pkcs7_signature()
> correctly handles dynamic pointers with data set to NULL.
>
> The tests are currently in the deny list for s390x (JIT does not support
> calling kernel function).
>
> Signed-off-by: Roberto Sassu <roberto.sassu@huawei.com>
> ---

Just a minor nit: you could probably use invalid flags value other
than 1, since most likely the next valid flag value will be 1, which
will require changing this again. LGTM otherwise.

Acked-by: Kumar Kartikeya Dwivedi <memxor@gmail.com>