bpf, selftests: Adjust few selftest result_unpriv outcomes
PATCH 1/1 bpf, selftests: Adjust few selftest result_unpriv outcomes
From: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
commit 1bad6fd52be4ce12d207e2820ceb0f29ab31fc53 upstream
Given we don't need to simulate the speculative domain for registers with immediates anymore since the verifier uses direct imm-based rewrites instead of having to mask, we can also lift a few cases that were previously rejected.
--- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/stack_ptr.c | 2 -- tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/value_ptr_arith.c | 8 -------- 2 files changed, 10 deletions(-)
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/stack_ptr.c +0 -2
@@ -291,8 +291,6 @@ BPF_LDX_MEM(BPF_B, BPF_REG_0, BPF_REG_1, 0), BPF_EXIT_INSN(), }, - .result_unpriv = REJECT, - .errstr_unpriv = "invalid stack off=0 size=1", .result = ACCEPT, .retval = 42, },
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/verifier/value_ptr_arith.c +0 -8
@@ -300,8 +300,6 @@ }, .fixup_map_array_48b = { 3 }, .result = ACCEPT, - .result_unpriv = REJECT, - .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic of map value goes out of range", .retval = 1, }, {
@@ -371,8 +369,6 @@ }, .fixup_map_array_48b = { 3 }, .result = ACCEPT, - .result_unpriv = REJECT, - .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic of map value goes out of range", .retval = 1, }, {
@@ -472,8 +468,6 @@ }, .fixup_map_array_48b = { 3 }, .result = ACCEPT, - .result_unpriv = REJECT, - .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic of map value goes out of range", .retval = 1, }, {
@@ -766,8 +760,6 @@ }, .fixup_map_array_48b = { 3 }, .result = ACCEPT, - .result_unpriv = REJECT, - .errstr_unpriv = "R0 pointer arithmetic of map value goes out of range", .retval = 1, }, {
Signature · 1 line
2.16.6
Greg KH
maintainerQuoted 11 lines · Shaoying Xu
From: Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>
commit
1bad6fd52be4ce12d207e2820ceb0f29ab31fc53upstreamGiven we don't need to simulate the speculative domain for registers with immediates anymore since the verifier uses direct imm-based rewrites instead of having to mask, we can also lift a few cases that were previously rejected.
Signed-off-by Daniel Borkmann <[email protected]>[[email protected] - backport to 5.4 with small contextual change]
What about 5.10 and 5.12, why wouldn't they also need this?
thanks,
greg k-h