diff mbox series

[bpf-next,v6,3/3] selftests/bpf: Skip callback tests if jit is disabled in test_verifier

Message ID 20240122075700.7120-4-yangtiezhu@loongson.cn (mailing list archive)
State Superseded
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series Skip callback tests if jit is disabled in test_verifier | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR fail PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-26 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_progs_parallel, true, 30) / test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat / veristat on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-17 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-39 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-18 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-40 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_maps, false, 360) / test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-41 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs, false, 360) / test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-42 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_cpuv4, false, 360) / test_progs_cpuv4 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-43 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_progs_no_alu32, false, 360) / test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-44 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test (test_verifier, false, 360) / test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-18
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-45 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / test
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for Validate matrix.py
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 fail Logs for aarch64-gcc / build / build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for aarch64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-0 success Logs for Lint
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for s390x-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for Unittests
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 success Logs for s390x-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 fail Logs for x86_64-gcc / build / build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / build-release
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 fail Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-17
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / test
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / test
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 fail Logs for s390x-gcc / build / build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for s390x-gcc / test
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 fail Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-18 and -O2 optimization
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 success Logs for x86_64-gcc / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / veristat
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 success Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / test
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 fail Logs for x86_64-llvm-18 / build / build for x86_64 with llvm-18
netdev/series_format success Posting correctly formatted
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/ynl success SINGLE THREAD; Generated files up to date; no warnings/errors; no diff in generated;
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 8 this patch: 8
netdev/build_tools success Errors and warnings before: 1 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers success CCed 0 of 0 maintainers
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 8 this patch: 8
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
netdev/deprecated_api success None detected
netdev/check_selftest success No net selftest shell script
netdev/verify_fixes success No Fixes tag
netdev/build_allmodconfig_warn success Errors and warnings before: 8 this patch: 8
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: line length of 99 exceeds 80 columns
netdev/build_clang_rust success No Rust files in patch. Skipping build
netdev/kdoc success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/source_inline success Was 0 now: 0
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 fail Logs for x86_64-llvm-17 / build-release / build for x86_64 with llvm-17 and -O2 optimization

Commit Message

Tiezhu Yang Jan. 22, 2024, 7:57 a.m. UTC 
If CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set and bpf_jit_enable is 0, there
exist 6 failed tests.

  [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
  [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
  [root@linux bpf]# ./test_verifier | grep FAIL
  #106/p inline simple bpf_loop call FAIL
  #107/p don't inline bpf_loop call, flags non-zero FAIL
  #108/p don't inline bpf_loop call, callback non-constant FAIL
  #109/p bpf_loop_inline and a dead func FAIL
  #110/p bpf_loop_inline stack locations for loop vars FAIL
  #111/p inline bpf_loop call in a big program FAIL
  Summary: 768 PASSED, 15 SKIPPED, 6 FAILED

The test log shows that callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs,
interpreter doesn't support them yet, thus these tests should be skipped
if jit is disabled, just handle this case in do_test_single().

With this patch:

  [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
  [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
  [root@linux bpf]# ./test_verifier | grep FAIL
  Summary: 768 PASSED, 21 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED

Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
Acked-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Acked-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
---
 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 13 +++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)

Comments

Andrii Nakryiko Jan. 23, 2024, 1:08 a.m. UTC | #1 
On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 11:57 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote:
>
> If CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set and bpf_jit_enable is 0, there
> exist 6 failed tests.
>
>   [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
>   [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
>   [root@linux bpf]# ./test_verifier | grep FAIL
>   #106/p inline simple bpf_loop call FAIL
>   #107/p don't inline bpf_loop call, flags non-zero FAIL
>   #108/p don't inline bpf_loop call, callback non-constant FAIL
>   #109/p bpf_loop_inline and a dead func FAIL
>   #110/p bpf_loop_inline stack locations for loop vars FAIL
>   #111/p inline bpf_loop call in a big program FAIL
>   Summary: 768 PASSED, 15 SKIPPED, 6 FAILED
>
> The test log shows that callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs,
> interpreter doesn't support them yet, thus these tests should be skipped
> if jit is disabled, just handle this case in do_test_single().
>
> With this patch:
>
>   [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/core/bpf_jit_enable
>   [root@linux bpf]# echo 0 > /proc/sys/kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled
>   [root@linux bpf]# ./test_verifier | grep FAIL
>   Summary: 768 PASSED, 21 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED
>
> Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn>
> Acked-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
> Acked-by: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 13 +++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index 1a09fc34d093..cf05448cfe13 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,7 @@
>                     1ULL << CAP_BPF)
>  #define UNPRIV_SYSCTL "kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled"
>  static bool unpriv_disabled = false;
> +static bool jit_disabled;
>  static int skips;
>  static bool verbose = false;
>  static int verif_log_level = 0;
> @@ -1622,6 +1623,16 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
>         alignment_prevented_execution = 0;
>
>         if (expected_ret == ACCEPT || expected_ret == VERBOSE_ACCEPT) {
> +               if (fd_prog < 0 && saved_errno == EINVAL && jit_disabled) {
> +                       for (i = 0; i < prog_len; i++, prog++) {
> +                               if (!insn_is_pseudo_func(prog))
> +                                       continue;
> +                               printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs)\n");
> +                               skips++;
> +                               goto close_fds;
> +                       }
> +               }

Wouldn't it be better to add an explicit flag to those tests to mark
that they require JIT enabled, instead of trying to derive this from
analysing their BPF instructions?


> +
>                 if (fd_prog < 0) {
>                         printf("FAIL\nFailed to load prog '%s'!\n",
>                                strerror(saved_errno));
> @@ -1844,6 +1855,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>                 return EXIT_FAILURE;
>         }
>
> +       jit_disabled = !is_jit_enabled();
> +
>         /* Use libbpf 1.0 API mode */
>         libbpf_set_strict_mode(LIBBPF_STRICT_ALL);
>
> --
> 2.42.0
>
Tiezhu Yang Jan. 23, 2024, 3:34 a.m. UTC | #2 
On 01/23/2024 09:08 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 11:57 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote:
>>
>> If CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set and bpf_jit_enable is 0, there
>> exist 6 failed tests.

...

>>         if (expected_ret == ACCEPT || expected_ret == VERBOSE_ACCEPT) {
>> +               if (fd_prog < 0 && saved_errno == EINVAL && jit_disabled) {
>> +                       for (i = 0; i < prog_len; i++, prog++) {
>> +                               if (!insn_is_pseudo_func(prog))
>> +                                       continue;
>> +                               printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs)\n");
>> +                               skips++;
>> +                               goto close_fds;
>> +                       }
>> +               }
>
> Wouldn't it be better to add an explicit flag to those tests to mark
> that they require JIT enabled, instead of trying to derive this from
> analysing their BPF instructions?

Maybe something like this, add test flag F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED in
bpf_loop_inline.c, check the flag and jit_disabled at the beginning
of do_test_single(), no need to check fd_prog, saved_errno and the other
conditions, the patch #2 can be removed too.

If you are OK with the following changes, I will send v7 later.

----->8-----

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c 
b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 1a09fc34d093..c65915188d7c 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@

  #define F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS     (1 << 0)
  #define F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT           (1 << 1)
+#define F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED                    (1 << 2)

  /* need CAP_BPF, CAP_NET_ADMIN, CAP_PERFMON to load progs */
  #define ADMIN_CAPS (1ULL << CAP_NET_ADMIN |    \
@@ -74,6 +75,7 @@
                     1ULL << CAP_BPF)
  #define UNPRIV_SYSCTL "kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled"
  static bool unpriv_disabled = false;
+static bool jit_disabled;
  static int skips;
  static bool verbose = false;
  static int verif_log_level = 0;
@@ -1524,6 +1526,13 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, 
bool unpriv,
         __u32 pflags;
         int i, err;

+       if ((test->flags & F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED) && jit_disabled) {
+               printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed 
programs)\n");
+               skips++;
+               sched_yield();
+               return;
+       }
+
         fd_prog = -1;
         for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)
                 map_fds[i] = -1;
@@ -1844,6 +1853,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
                 return EXIT_FAILURE;
         }

+       jit_disabled = !is_jit_enabled();
+
         /* Use libbpf 1.0 API mode */
         libbpf_set_strict_mode(LIBBPF_STRICT_ALL);

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c 
b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
index a535d41dc20d..59125b22ae39 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
@@ -57,6 +57,7 @@
         .expected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
         .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .runs = 0,
         .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 12, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
@@ -90,6 +91,7 @@
         .expected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .unexpected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .runs = 0,
         .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 16, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
@@ -127,6 +129,7 @@
         .expected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .unexpected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .runs = 0,
         .func_info = {
@@ -165,6 +168,7 @@
         .expected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
         .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .runs = 0,
         .func_info = {
@@ -235,6 +239,7 @@
         },
         .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .func_info = {
                 { 0, MAIN_TYPE },
@@ -252,6 +257,7 @@
         .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
         .result = ACCEPT,
         .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
+       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
         .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 16, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
         .func_info_cnt = 2,
         BTF_TYPES

Thanks,
Tiezhu
Andrii Nakryiko Jan. 23, 2024, 5:43 a.m. UTC | #3 
On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 7:35 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 01/23/2024 09:08 AM, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 21, 2024 at 11:57 PM Tiezhu Yang <yangtiezhu@loongson.cn> wrote:
> >>
> >> If CONFIG_BPF_JIT_ALWAYS_ON is not set and bpf_jit_enable is 0, there
> >> exist 6 failed tests.
>
> ...
>
> >>         if (expected_ret == ACCEPT || expected_ret == VERBOSE_ACCEPT) {
> >> +               if (fd_prog < 0 && saved_errno == EINVAL && jit_disabled) {
> >> +                       for (i = 0; i < prog_len; i++, prog++) {
> >> +                               if (!insn_is_pseudo_func(prog))
> >> +                                       continue;
> >> +                               printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs)\n");
> >> +                               skips++;
> >> +                               goto close_fds;
> >> +                       }
> >> +               }
> >
> > Wouldn't it be better to add an explicit flag to those tests to mark
> > that they require JIT enabled, instead of trying to derive this from
> > analysing their BPF instructions?
>
> Maybe something like this, add test flag F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED in
> bpf_loop_inline.c, check the flag and jit_disabled at the beginning
> of do_test_single(), no need to check fd_prog, saved_errno and the other
> conditions, the patch #2 can be removed too.
>
> If you are OK with the following changes, I will send v7 later.
>

Yes, I think this approach is much better, thanks.

> ----->8-----
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index 1a09fc34d093..c65915188d7c 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -67,6 +67,7 @@
>
>   #define F_NEEDS_EFFICIENT_UNALIGNED_ACCESS     (1 << 0)
>   #define F_LOAD_WITH_STRICT_ALIGNMENT           (1 << 1)
> +#define F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED                    (1 << 2)
>
>   /* need CAP_BPF, CAP_NET_ADMIN, CAP_PERFMON to load progs */
>   #define ADMIN_CAPS (1ULL << CAP_NET_ADMIN |    \
> @@ -74,6 +75,7 @@
>                      1ULL << CAP_BPF)
>   #define UNPRIV_SYSCTL "kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled"
>   static bool unpriv_disabled = false;
> +static bool jit_disabled;
>   static int skips;
>   static bool verbose = false;
>   static int verif_log_level = 0;
> @@ -1524,6 +1526,13 @@ static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test,
> bool unpriv,
>          __u32 pflags;
>          int i, err;
>
> +       if ((test->flags & F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED) && jit_disabled) {
> +               printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed
> programs)\n");
> +               skips++;
> +               sched_yield();
> +               return;
> +       }
> +
>          fd_prog = -1;
>          for (i = 0; i < MAX_NR_MAPS; i++)
>                  map_fds[i] = -1;
> @@ -1844,6 +1853,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
>                  return EXIT_FAILURE;
>          }
>
> +       jit_disabled = !is_jit_enabled();
> +
>          /* Use libbpf 1.0 API mode */
>          libbpf_set_strict_mode(LIBBPF_STRICT_ALL);
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
> b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
> index a535d41dc20d..59125b22ae39 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_loop_inline.c
> @@ -57,6 +57,7 @@
>          .expected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
>          .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .runs = 0,
>          .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 12, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
> @@ -90,6 +91,7 @@
>          .expected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .unexpected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .runs = 0,
>          .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 16, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
> @@ -127,6 +129,7 @@
>          .expected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .unexpected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .runs = 0,
>          .func_info = {
> @@ -165,6 +168,7 @@
>          .expected_insns = { PSEUDO_CALL_INSN() },
>          .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .runs = 0,
>          .func_info = {
> @@ -235,6 +239,7 @@
>          },
>          .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .func_info = {
>                  { 0, MAIN_TYPE },
> @@ -252,6 +257,7 @@
>          .unexpected_insns = { HELPER_CALL_INSN() },
>          .result = ACCEPT,
>          .prog_type = BPF_PROG_TYPE_TRACEPOINT,
> +       .flags = F_NEEDS_JIT_ENABLED,
>          .func_info = { { 0, MAIN_TYPE }, { 16, CALLBACK_TYPE } },
>          .func_info_cnt = 2,
>          BTF_TYPES
>
> Thanks,
> Tiezhu
>
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
index 1a09fc34d093..cf05448cfe13 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
@@ -74,6 +74,7 @@ 
 		    1ULL << CAP_BPF)
 #define UNPRIV_SYSCTL "kernel/unprivileged_bpf_disabled"
 static bool unpriv_disabled = false;
+static bool jit_disabled;
 static int skips;
 static bool verbose = false;
 static int verif_log_level = 0;
@@ -1622,6 +1623,16 @@  static void do_test_single(struct bpf_test *test, bool unpriv,
 	alignment_prevented_execution = 0;
 
 	if (expected_ret == ACCEPT || expected_ret == VERBOSE_ACCEPT) {
+		if (fd_prog < 0 && saved_errno == EINVAL && jit_disabled) {
+			for (i = 0; i < prog_len; i++, prog++) {
+				if (!insn_is_pseudo_func(prog))
+					continue;
+				printf("SKIP (callbacks are not allowed in non-JITed programs)\n");
+				skips++;
+				goto close_fds;
+			}
+		}
+
 		if (fd_prog < 0) {
 			printf("FAIL\nFailed to load prog '%s'!\n",
 			       strerror(saved_errno));
@@ -1844,6 +1855,8 @@  int main(int argc, char **argv)
 		return EXIT_FAILURE;
 	}
 
+	jit_disabled = !is_jit_enabled();
+
 	/* Use libbpf 1.0 API mode */
 	libbpf_set_strict_mode(LIBBPF_STRICT_ALL);