Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1660681 > unrolled thread

Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: change test_verifier  expectations Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com> - 2017-06-08 04:50 +0200
    Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: change test_verifier  expectations Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com> - 2017-06-08 17:30 +0200

#1660681 — Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 5/5] selftests/bpf: change test_verifier expectations

On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:00:02PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
> Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs
>  that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
> ---
>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 226 ++++++++++++++--------------
>  1 file changed, 116 insertions(+), 110 deletions(-)

imo this rewrite needs more than one additional test.
Like i counted at least 2 new verifier features (like negative and ptr & 0x40)
All the new logic needs to be covered by tests.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#1661377

On 08/06/17 03:43, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 07, 2017 at 04:00:02PM +0100, Edward Cree wrote:
>> Some of the verifier's error messages have changed, and some constructs
>>  that previously couldn't be verified are now accepted.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@solarflare.com>
>> ---
>>  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 226 ++++++++++++++--------------
>>  1 file changed, 116 insertions(+), 110 deletions(-)
> imo this rewrite needs more than one additional test.
> Like i counted at least 2 new verifier features (like negative and ptr & 0x40)
> All the new logic needs to be covered by tests.
Yes, I will write some new tests to cover the new features.  I just wanted
 to get some comments on the patch first, in case I was barking up entirely
 the wrong tree.

-Ed

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web