From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD1CBC432BE for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 21:30:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C25760C51 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 21:30:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233500AbhG2Va6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 17:30:58 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51358 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231164AbhG2Va5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jul 2021 17:30:57 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb30.google.com (mail-yb1-xb30.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b30]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1B017C061765 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:30:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb30.google.com with SMTP id s48so12461865ybi.7 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:30:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=anyfinetworks-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=W7A9NX6+R1ItDbdDIykYJjZM1Xg5IpEpNDoq6IEGQ8o=; b=JTVj1vaunTbw9kjl1pX0C+tDUCSH3ibGRU4k4l2Hxh7n9Sdl40XCw2otPlx68jrCcM cc7Qlx0M1K7JKWWG6ceg5i4rxVa80c+RkHxopfGq59XpvV454renSO/OpK0/sYs7k/Dw k9ywW5HKeQGBD6sHVpQiXwjxFk5y6AdUG1rHTuMpqPgtldoU2Aj75lZ0suFTaoZJXVdt Ox6r0DMvIBiBTmgsU5j6t8yHwCtfw9H302+gY5pQJshKZvBDyeDnDLTBdxdpaA0VJ+61 t1qCxCuyaCm0LqvLn9L3jYzGA3BxNSyEhkr71nzirtzWqDL1h0z/m1WIl1ntdB1D7rDN Uh/g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=W7A9NX6+R1ItDbdDIykYJjZM1Xg5IpEpNDoq6IEGQ8o=; b=Xy0tcxJTeOtmf41ZW7J1IagTkeeN3UicMVR0BJPFl92K3ahN27nBCcUVZ5oQFqIKIH uHfOa+o5EoFZxFJzPqsmLImD2HqKZ5Vo7B5lNqzZXoYSB8Kij9fQYGSMpK8Bgq05vke1 EIns2Y9tju5gctVp3dKjb+nRCn1IMeDFhwAebnpWqYrMkIuIew9jiaRRenPEZc3SaF2p rAuExB7kKotcnHSBhaQ+gnxjD5oKBF2UuUKQIAnR+eVEVYull6J4D2AIGUeuqEzEZwEz NXhiS6i6VcDkZMNH5jNgxZMLaU/fSOa5piqMD8uFMUTXjeZhUPCfKw49mkybAQ5fNYIY VGnQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532nqqYI10TMKb5uafm+r43+wZcPhDprcPXGTdQS74FL0NwtCljD qmd9NQTusISzRpP2S6l/+aP/DQkb6qqDxniCJh50Sg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzuhcxaS2sQ+qP2XuyzDDaW9wET+IM6k8IAttgmQzrnqgR5umhTtP9xE3TkKRLiUwaLFRcOhflSQlq/XZT5vwM= X-Received: by 2002:a25:6b51:: with SMTP id o17mr9577028ybm.149.1627594253432; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 14:30:53 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20210728170502.351010-1-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com> <20210728170502.351010-2-johan.almbladh@anyfinetworks.com> In-Reply-To: From: Johan Almbladh Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2021 23:30:42 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] bpf/tests: Add BPF_JMP32 test cases To: Yonghong Song Cc: Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , Andrii Nakryiko , Martin KaFai Lau , Song Liu , John Fastabend , KP Singh , Tony Ambardar , Networking , bpf Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 12:31 AM Yonghong Song wrote: > > + /* BPF_JMP32 | BPF_JGT | BPF_X */ > > + { > > + "JMP32_JGT_X", > > + .u.insns_int = { > > + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R0, 0xfffffffe), > > + BPF_ALU32_IMM(BPF_MOV, R1, 0xffffffff), > > + BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JGT, R0, R1, 1), > > Maybe change the offset from 1 to 2? Otherwise, this may jump to > BPF_JMP32_REG(BPF_JGT, R0, R1, 1) > which will just do the same comparison and jump to BTT_EXIT_INSN() > which will also have R0 = 0xfffffffe at the end. You are right. All BPF_X versions should have the first jump offset incremented by one to account for the extra MOV that is not present in the BPF_K version of the test. I'll correct it.