| Message ID | a9fc2ff0c27317ae8ac2d56a819eeac5a281dd86.1569496399.git.jstancek@redhat.com |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
| Series | syscalls/bpf: auto bump RLIMIT_MEMLOCK | expand |
Hi! > eBPF tests may fail (-EPERM) if max locked memory limit is too low. > User-space tools such as perf started increasing MELOCK limit to > avoid this problem. > > LTP follows same approach and will attempt to raise RLIMIT_MEMLOCK > if possible, otherwise prints an info message. > > Link: http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2019-August/013349.html > Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/17/714 > Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> Looks good, acked. Also have you had a look at the eBPF regression test? Do you mind if I push that before the release (with added call to adjust the memlock limit)?
----- Original Message ----- > Hi! > > eBPF tests may fail (-EPERM) if max locked memory limit is too low. > > User-space tools such as perf started increasing MELOCK limit to > > avoid this problem. > > > > LTP follows same approach and will attempt to raise RLIMIT_MEMLOCK > > if possible, otherwise prints an info message. > > > > Link: http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2019-August/013349.html > > Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/17/714 > > Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> > > Looks good, acked. Thanks, pushed with typo above fixed: s/MELOCK/MEMLOCK/. > > Also have you had a look at the eBPF regression test? > > Do you mind if I push that before the release (with added call to adjust > the memlock limit)? If you mean "Regression test for 64bit arithmetic", I think that's OK for release. > > -- > Cyril Hrubis > chrubis@suse.cz >
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_common.h b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_common.h new file mode 100644 index 000000000000..03e46c5d427e --- /dev/null +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_common.h @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later */ +/* + * Copyright (c) 2019 Linux Test Project + */ + +#ifndef LTP_BPF_COMMON_H +#define LTP_BPF_COMMON_H + +#define BPF_MEMLOCK_ADD (256*1024) + +void rlimit_bump_memlock(void) +{ + struct rlimit memlock_r; + + SAFE_GETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &memlock_r); + memlock_r.rlim_cur += BPF_MEMLOCK_ADD; + tst_res(TINFO, "Raising RLIMIT_MEMLOCK to %ld", + (long)memlock_r.rlim_cur); + + if (memlock_r.rlim_cur <= memlock_r.rlim_max) { + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &memlock_r); + } else if ((geteuid() == 0)) { + memlock_r.rlim_max += BPF_MEMLOCK_ADD; + SAFE_SETRLIMIT(RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, &memlock_r); + } else { + tst_res(TINFO, "Can't raise RLIMIT_MEMLOCK, test may fail " + "due to lack of max locked memory"); + } +} + +#endif diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_map01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_map01.c index 13dde0b4e12f..49d32776ef41 100644 --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_map01.c +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_map01.c @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ #include "config.h" #include "tst_test.h" #include "lapi/bpf.h" +#include "bpf_common.h" #define VAL_SZ 1024 @@ -140,6 +141,8 @@ static void setup(void) { unsigned int i; + rlimit_bump_memlock(); + memcpy(key8, "12345678", 8); memset(key4, 0, 4); diff --git a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_prog01.c b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_prog01.c index 3252f92774d1..46a909fe2ec4 100644 --- a/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_prog01.c +++ b/testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_prog01.c @@ -27,6 +27,7 @@ #include "tst_test.h" #include "lapi/socket.h" #include "lapi/bpf.h" +#include "bpf_common.h" const char MSG[] = "Ahoj!"; static char *msg; @@ -94,6 +95,8 @@ int load_prog(int fd) void setup(void) { + rlimit_bump_memlock(); + memcpy(prog, PROG, sizeof(PROG)); memcpy(msg, MSG, sizeof(MSG)); }
eBPF tests may fail (-EPERM) if max locked memory limit is too low. User-space tools such as perf started increasing MELOCK limit to avoid this problem. LTP follows same approach and will attempt to raise RLIMIT_MEMLOCK if possible, otherwise prints an info message. Link: http://lists.linux.it/pipermail/ltp/2019-August/013349.html Link: https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/7/17/714 Signed-off-by: Jan Stancek <jstancek@redhat.com> --- testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_common.h | 31 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_map01.c | 3 +++ testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_prog01.c | 3 +++ 3 files changed, 37 insertions(+) create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/syscalls/bpf/bpf_common.h