Re: [RFC PATCH bpf-next v6 3/3] selftests/bpf: Handle forwarding of UDP CLOCK_TAI packets

From: Abhishek Chauhan (ABC)
Date: Mon May 06 2024 - 19:41:18 EST




On 5/6/2024 1:54 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>
>
> On 5/6/2024 1:50 PM, Abhishek Chauhan (ABC) wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 5/6/2024 12:04 PM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>>> Abhishek Chauhan wrote:
>>>> With changes in the design to forward CLOCK_TAI in the skbuff
>>>> framework, existing selftest framework needs modification
>>>> to handle forwarding of UDP packets with CLOCK_TAI as clockid.
>>>>
>>>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/bc037db4-58bb-4861-ac31-a361a93841d3@xxxxxxxxx/
>>>> Signed-off-by: Abhishek Chauhan <quic_abchauha@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>> tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h | 15 ++++---
>>>> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c | 10 +++--
>>>> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tc_redirect.c | 3 --
>>>> .../selftests/bpf/progs/test_tc_dtime.c | 39 +++++++++----------
>>>> 4 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> index 90706a47f6ff..25ea393cf084 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/bpf.h
>>>> @@ -6207,12 +6207,17 @@ union { \
>>>> __u64 :64; \
>>>> } __attribute__((aligned(8)))
>>>>
>>>> +/* The enum used in skb->tstamp_type. It specifies the clock type
>>>> + * of the time stored in the skb->tstamp.
>>>> + */
>>>> enum {
>>>> - BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_UNSPEC,
>>>> - BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_MONO, /* tstamp has mono delivery time */
>>>> - /* For any BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_* that the bpf prog cannot handle,
>>>> - * the bpf prog should handle it like BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_UNSPEC
>>>> - * and try to deduce it by ingress, egress or skb->sk->sk_clockid.
>>>> + BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_UNSPEC = 0, /* DEPRECATED */
>>>> + BPF_SKB_TSTAMP_DELIVERY_MONO = 1, /* DEPRECATED */
>>>> + BPF_SKB_CLOCK_REALTIME = 0,
>>>> + BPF_SKB_CLOCK_MONOTONIC = 1,
>>>> + BPF_SKB_CLOCK_TAI = 2,
>>>> + /* For any future BPF_SKB_CLOCK_* that the bpf prog cannot handle,
>>>> + * the bpf prog can try to deduce it by ingress/egress/skb->sk->sk_clockid.
>>>> */
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c
>>>> index 3b7c57fe55a5..71940f4ef0fb 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c
>>>> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/ctx_rewrite.c
>>>> @@ -69,15 +69,17 @@ static struct test_case test_cases[] = {
>>>> {
>>>> N(SCHED_CLS, struct __sk_buff, tstamp),
>>>> .read = "r11 = *(u8 *)($ctx + sk_buff::__mono_tc_offset);"
>>>> - "w11 &= 3;"
>>>> - "if w11 != 0x3 goto pc+2;"
>>>> + "if w11 == 0x4 goto pc+1;"
>>>> + "goto pc+4;"
>>>> + "if w11 == 0x3 goto pc+1;"
>>>> + "goto pc+2;"
>>>
>>> Not an expert on this code, and I see that the existing code already
>>> has this below, but: isn't it odd and unnecessary to jump to an
>>> unconditional jump statement?
>>>
>> I am closely looking into your comment and i will evalute it(Martin can correct me
>> if the jumps are correct or not as i am new to BPF as well) but i found out that
>> JSET = "&" and not "==". So the above two ins has to change from -
>>
>> "if w11 == 0x4 goto pc+1;" ==>(needs to be corrected to) "if w11 & 0x4 goto pc+1;"
>> "if w11 == 0x3 goto pc+1;" ==> (needs to be correct to) "if w11 & 0x3 goto pc+1;"
>>
>>
Willem, I looked at the jumps in the above code. They look correct to me.
Martin can check too if i am doing anything wrong here other than the JSET "&".

Ideally pc(program counter) points to the next instruction.

"if w11 & 0x4 goto pc+1;"
"goto pc+4;"
[pc+0] "if w11 & 0x3 goto pc+1;" <== PC is going to be here
[pc+1] "goto pc+2;"
[pc+2] "$dst = 0;"
[pc+3] "goto pc+1;"
[pc+4] "$dst = *(u64 *)($ctx + sk_buff::tstamp);", <== This is where the code is intended to jump to for "goto pc+4;"



>>>> "$dst = 0;"
>>>> "goto pc+1;"
>>>> "$dst = *(u64 *)($ctx + sk_buff::tstamp);",
>>>> .write = "r11 = *(u8 *)($ctx + sk_buff::__mono_tc_offset);"
>>>> - "if w11 & 0x2 goto pc+1;"
>>>> + "if w11 & 0x4 goto pc+1;"
>>>> "goto pc+2;"
>>>> - "w11 &= -2;"
>>>> + "w11 &= -3;"