Re: [PATCH 4.19 0/9] bpf: fix verifier selftests on inefficient unaligned access architectures

On 06/02/2021 11:27 AM, Tiezhu Yang wrote:

With the following patch series, all verifier selftests pass on the archs which
select HAVE_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS.

[v2,4.19,00/19] bpf: fix verifier selftests, add CVE-2021-29155, CVE-2021-33200 fixes
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/netdevbpf/cover/20210528103810.22025-1-ovidiu.panait@windriver.com/

But on inefficient unaligned access architectures, there still exist many failures,
so some patches about F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS are also needed, backport
to 4.19 with a minor context difference.

This patch series is based on the series (all now queued up by greg k-h):
"bpf: fix verifier selftests, add CVE-2021-29155, CVE-2021-33200 fixes".

Björn Töpel (2):
   selftests/bpf: add "any alignment" annotation for some tests
   selftests/bpf: Avoid running unprivileged tests with alignment
     requirements

Daniel Borkmann (2):
   bpf: fix test suite to enable all unpriv program types
   bpf: test make sure to run unpriv test cases in test_verifier

David S. Miller (4):
   bpf: Add BPF_F_ANY_ALIGNMENT.
   bpf: Adjust F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS handling in
     test_verifier.c
   bpf: Make more use of 'any' alignment in test_verifier.c
   bpf: Apply F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS to more ACCEPT test
     cases.

Joe Stringer (1):
   selftests/bpf: Generalize dummy program types

  include/uapi/linux/bpf.h                    |  14 ++
  kernel/bpf/syscall.c                        |   7 +-
  kernel/bpf/verifier.c                       |   3 +
  tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h              |  14 ++
  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.c                         |   8 +-
  tools/lib/bpf/bpf.h                         |   2 +-
  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_align.c    |   4 +-
  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 224 ++++++++++++++++++++--------
  8 files changed, 206 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)

Hi Greg and Sasha,

Could you please apply this series to 4.19?
Any comments will be much appreciated.

Thanks,
Tiezhu