Thread (11 messages) 11 messages, 2 authors, 2020-12-22

Re: [PATCH bpf-next V9 7/7] bpf/selftests: tests using bpf_check_mtu BPF-helper

From: Andrii Nakryiko <hidden>
Date: 2020-12-18 20:14:51
Also in: bpf

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:30 AM Jesper Dangaard Brouer
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Adding selftest for BPF-helper bpf_check_mtu(). Making sure
it can be used from both XDP and TC.

Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <redacted>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c |  204 ++++++++++++++++++++
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_check_mtu.c |  196 +++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 400 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/test_check_mtu.c
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..b5d0c3a9abe8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/check_mtu.c
@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0
+/* Copyright (c) 2020 Jesper Dangaard Brouer */
+
+#include <linux/if_link.h> /* before test_progs.h, avoid bpf_util.h redefines */
+
+#include <test_progs.h>
+#include "test_check_mtu.skel.h"
+#include <network_helpers.h>
+
+#include <stdlib.h>
+#include <inttypes.h>
+
+#define IFINDEX_LO 1
+
+static __u32 duration; /* Hint: needed for CHECK macro */
+
+static int read_mtu_device_lo(void)
+{
+       const char *filename = "/sys/devices/virtual/net/lo/mtu";
+       char buf[11] = {};
+       int value;
+       int fd;
+
+       fd = open(filename, 0, O_RDONLY);
+       if (fd == -1)
+               return -1;
+
+       if (read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf)) == -1)
close fd missing here?
+               return -2;
+       close(fd);
+
+       value = strtoimax(buf, NULL, 10);
+       if (errno == ERANGE)
+               return -3;
+
+       return value;
+}
+
+static void test_check_mtu_xdp_attach(struct bpf_program *prog)
+{
+       int err = 0;
+       int fd;
+
+       fd = bpf_program__fd(prog);
+       err = bpf_set_link_xdp_fd(IFINDEX_LO, fd, XDP_FLAGS_SKB_MODE);
+       if (CHECK(err, "XDP-attach", "failed"))
+               return;
+
+       bpf_set_link_xdp_fd(IFINDEX_LO, -1, 0);
can you please use bpf_link-based bpf_program__attach_xdp() which will
provide auto-cleanup in case of crash?

also check that it succeeded?
+}
+
+static void test_check_mtu_run_xdp(struct test_check_mtu *skel,
+                                  struct bpf_program *prog,
+                                  __u32 mtu_expect)
+{
+       const char *prog_name = bpf_program__name(prog);
+       int retval_expect = XDP_PASS;
+       __u32 mtu_result = 0;
+       char buf[256];
+       int err;
+
+       struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr tattr = {
+               .repeat = 1,
+               .data_in = &pkt_v4,
+               .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
+               .data_out = buf,
+               .data_size_out = sizeof(buf),
+               .prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(prog),
+       };
nit: it's a variable declaration, so keep it all in one block. There
is also opts-based variant, which might be good to use here instead.
+
+       memset(buf, 0, sizeof(buf));
char buf[256] = {}; would make this unnecessary

+
+       err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&tattr);
+       CHECK_ATTR(err != 0 || errno != 0, "bpf_prog_test_run",
+                  "prog_name:%s (err %d errno %d retval %d)\n",
+                  prog_name, err, errno, tattr.retval);
+
+        CHECK(tattr.retval != retval_expect, "retval",
whitespaces are off?
+             "progname:%s unexpected retval=%d expected=%d\n",
+             prog_name, tattr.retval, retval_expect);
+
+       /* Extract MTU that BPF-prog got */
+       mtu_result = skel->bss->global_bpf_mtu_xdp;
+       CHECK(mtu_result != mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user",
+             "failed (MTU user:%d bpf:%d)", mtu_expect, mtu_result);
There is nicer ASSERT_EQ() macro for such cases:

ASSERT_EQ(mtu_result, mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user"); it will format
sensible error message automatically
+}
+
[...]
+       char buf[256];
+       int err;
+
+       struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr tattr = {
+               .repeat = 1,
+               .data_in = &pkt_v4,
+               .data_size_in = sizeof(pkt_v4),
+               .data_out = buf,
+               .data_size_out = sizeof(buf),
+               .prog_fd = bpf_program__fd(prog),
+       };
+
+       memset(buf, 0, sizeof(buf));
+
same as above
+       err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&tattr);
+       CHECK_ATTR(err != 0 || errno != 0, "bpf_prog_test_run",
+                  "prog_name:%s (err %d errno %d retval %d)\n",
+                  prog_name, err, errno, tattr.retval);
+
+        CHECK(tattr.retval != retval_expect, "retval",
same :)
+             "progname:%s unexpected retval=%d expected=%d\n",
+             prog_name, tattr.retval, retval_expect);
+
+       /* Extract MTU that BPF-prog got */
+       mtu_result = skel->bss->global_bpf_mtu_tc;
+       CHECK(mtu_result != mtu_expect, "MTU-compare-user",
+             "failed (MTU user:%d bpf:%d)", mtu_expect, mtu_result);
+}
+
+
[...]
+
+void test_check_mtu(void)
+{
+       struct test_check_mtu *skel;
+       __u32 mtu_lo;
+
+       skel = test_check_mtu__open_and_load();
+       if (CHECK(!skel, "open and load skel", "failed"))
+               return; /* Exit if e.g. helper unknown to kernel */
+
+       if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-attach"))
+               test_check_mtu_xdp_attach(skel->progs.xdp_use_helper_basic);
+
+       test_check_mtu__destroy(skel);
here it's not clear why you instantiate skeleton outside of
test_check_mtu_xdp_attach() subtest. Can you please move it in? It
will keep this failure local to that specific subtest, not the entire
test. And is just cleaner, of course.
+
+       mtu_lo = read_mtu_device_lo();
+       if (CHECK(mtu_lo < 0, "reading MTU value", "failed (err:%d)", mtu_lo))
ASSERT_OK() could be used here
+               return;
+
+       if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-run"))
+               test_check_mtu_xdp(mtu_lo, 0);
+
+       if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu XDP-run ifindex-lookup"))
+               test_check_mtu_xdp(mtu_lo, IFINDEX_LO);
+
+       if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu TC-run"))
+               test_check_mtu_tc(mtu_lo, 0);
+
+       if (test__start_subtest("bpf_check_mtu TC-run ifindex-lookup"))
+               test_check_mtu_tc(mtu_lo, IFINDEX_LO);
+}
[...]
+
+       global_bpf_mtu_tc = mtu_len;
+       return retval;
+}
+
+SEC("classifier")
nice use of the same SEC()'tion BPF programs!

+int tc_minus_delta(struct __sk_buff *ctx)
+{
+       int retval = BPF_OK; /* Expected retval on successful test */
+       __u32 ifindex = GLOBAL_USER_IFINDEX;
+       __u32 skb_len = ctx->len;
+       __u32 mtu_len = 0;
+       int delta;
+
+       /* Boarderline test case: Minus delta exceeding packet length allowed */
+       delta = -((skb_len - ETH_HLEN) + 1);
+
+       /* Minus length (adjusted via delta) still pass MTU check, other helpers
+        * are responsible for catching this, when doing actual size adjust
+        */
+       if (bpf_check_mtu(ctx, ifindex, &mtu_len, delta, 0))
+               retval = BPF_DROP;
+
+       global_bpf_mtu_xdp = mtu_len;
+       return retval;
+}
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help