| Message ID | 639d61f73c907b704001ed2b115208998990eb38.1481762158.git.daniel@iogearbox.net |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On 12/14/16 4:39 PM, Daniel Borkmann wrote: > Running ./test_verifier as unprivileged lets 1 out of 98 tests fail: > > [...] > #71 unpriv: check that printk is disallowed FAIL > Unexpected error message! > 0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 > 1: (bf) r1 = r10 > 2: (07) r1 += -8 > 3: (b7) r2 = 8 > 4: (bf) r3 = r1 > 5: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6 > unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6 > [...] > > The test case is correct, just that the error outcome changed with > ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id"). > Same as with e00c7b216f34 ("bpf: fix multiple issues in selftest suite > and samples") issue 2), so just fix up the function name. > > Fixes: ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id") > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> was thinking to send the same fix. Thanks you for beating me :) Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2016 01:39:10 +0100 > Running ./test_verifier as unprivileged lets 1 out of 98 tests fail: > > [...] > #71 unpriv: check that printk is disallowed FAIL > Unexpected error message! > 0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 > 1: (bf) r1 = r10 > 2: (07) r1 += -8 > 3: (b7) r2 = 8 > 4: (bf) r3 = r1 > 5: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6 > unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6 > [...] > > The test case is correct, just that the error outcome changed with > ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id"). > Same as with e00c7b216f34 ("bpf: fix multiple issues in selftest suite > and samples") issue 2), so just fix up the function name. > > Fixes: ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id") > Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> Applied.
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c index 072dc63..853d7e4 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c @@ -1059,7 +1059,7 @@ struct test_val { BPF_MOV64_IMM(BPF_REG_0, 0), BPF_EXIT_INSN(), }, - .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func 6", + .errstr_unpriv = "unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6", .result_unpriv = REJECT, .result = ACCEPT, },
Running ./test_verifier as unprivileged lets 1 out of 98 tests fail: [...] #71 unpriv: check that printk is disallowed FAIL Unexpected error message! 0: (7a) *(u64 *)(r10 -8) = 0 1: (bf) r1 = r10 2: (07) r1 += -8 3: (b7) r2 = 8 4: (bf) r3 = r1 5: (85) call bpf_trace_printk#6 unknown func bpf_trace_printk#6 [...] The test case is correct, just that the error outcome changed with ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id"). Same as with e00c7b216f34 ("bpf: fix multiple issues in selftest suite and samples") issue 2), so just fix up the function name. Fixes: ebb676daa1a3 ("bpf: Print function name in addition to function id") Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net> --- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)