diff mbox series

[RFC,bpf-next,2/5] selftests/bpf: check if verifier tracks constants spilled by BPF_ST_MEM

Message ID 20221231163122.1360813-3-eddyz87@gmail.com (mailing list archive)
State RFC
Delegated to: BPF
Headers show
Series Support for BPF_ST instruction in LLVM C compiler | expand

Checks

Context Check Description
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-PR pending PR summary
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-1 success Logs for ShellCheck
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-2 success Logs for build for aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-5 success Logs for build for x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-6 success Logs for build for x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-7 success Logs for llvm-toolchain
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-8 success Logs for set-matrix
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-3 success Logs for build for aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-4 success Logs for build for s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-11 pending Logs for test_maps on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-9 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-10 success Logs for test_maps on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-12 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-13 success Logs for test_maps on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-14 fail Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-15 fail Logs for test_progs on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-17 fail Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-18 fail Logs for test_progs on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-19 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-20 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-22 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-23 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-24 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-25 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-27 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-28 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-29 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-30 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-32 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-33 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on x86_64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-34 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-35 success Logs for test_verifier on aarch64 with llvm-16
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-36 success Logs for test_verifier on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-37 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-38 success Logs for test_verifier on x86_64 with llvm-16
netdev/tree_selection success Clearly marked for bpf-next
netdev/fixes_present success Fixes tag not required for -next series
netdev/subject_prefix success Link
netdev/cover_letter success Series has a cover letter
netdev/patch_count success Link
netdev/header_inline success No static functions without inline keyword in header files
netdev/build_32bit success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/cc_maintainers warning 10 maintainers not CCed: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org kpsingh@kernel.org haoluo@google.com song@kernel.org martin.lau@linux.dev sdf@google.com john.fastabend@gmail.com shuah@kernel.org jolsa@kernel.org mykolal@fb.com
netdev/build_clang success Errors and warnings before: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/module_param success Was 0 now: 0
netdev/verify_signedoff success Signed-off-by tag matches author and committer
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: 0 this patch: 0
netdev/checkpatch warning WARNING: Missing or malformed SPDX-License-Identifier tag in line 1 WARNING: added, moved or deleted file(s), does MAINTAINERS need updating?
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-26 success Logs for test_progs_no_alu32_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-21 fail Logs for test_progs_no_alu32 on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-31 success Logs for test_progs_parallel on s390x with gcc
bpf/vmtest-bpf-next-VM_Test-16 fail Logs for test_progs on s390x with gcc

Commit Message

Eduard Zingerman Dec. 31, 2022, 4:31 p.m. UTC 
Check that verifier tracks the value of 'imm' spilled to stack by
BPF_ST_MEM instruction. Cover the following cases:
- write of non-zero constant to stack;
- write of a zero constant to stack.

Signed-off-by: Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@gmail.com>
---
 .../selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_st_mem.c       | 29 +++++++++++++++++++
 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_st_mem.c
diff mbox series

Patch

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_st_mem.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_st_mem.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..d3aa293f1a9d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/bpf_st_mem.c
@@ -0,0 +1,29 @@ 
+{
+	"BPF_ST_MEM stack imm non-zero",
+	.insns = {
+	BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 42),
+	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_10, -8),
+	BPF_ALU64_IMM(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, -42),
+	/* if value is tracked correctly R0 is zero */
+	BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+	},
+	.result = ACCEPT,
+},
+{
+	"BPF_ST_MEM stack imm zero",
+	.insns = {
+	/* mark stack 0000 0000 */
+	BPF_ST_MEM(BPF_DW, BPF_REG_10, -8, 0),
+	/* read and sum a few bytes */
+	BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0),
+	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -8),
+	BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -4),
+	BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+	BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_1, BPF_REG_10, -1),
+	BPF_ALU64_REG(BPF_ADD, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1),
+	/* if value is tracked correctly R0 is zero */
+	BPF_EXIT_INSN(),
+	},
+	.result = ACCEPT,
+},