Skip to content

bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, 0, "foo") cannot possibly work ? #170

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, 0, "foo") cannot possibly work ? #170

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kernel-patches-bot
Copy link

Pull request for series with
subject: bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, 0, "foo") cannot possibly work ?
version: 1
url: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bpf/list/?series=359505

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

Master branch: d82a532
series: https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bpf/list/?series=359505
version: 1

Pull request is NOT updated. Failed to apply https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bpf/list/?series=359505
error message:

Cmd('git') failed due to: exit code(128)
  cmdline: git am -3
  stdout: 'Applying: bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, 0, "foo") cannot possibly work ?
Patch failed at 0001 bpf_program__set_attach_target(prog, 0, "foo") cannot possibly work ?
When you have resolved this problem, run "git am --continue".
If you prefer to skip this patch, run "git am --skip" instead.
To restore the original branch and stop patching, run "git am --abort".'
  stderr: 'error: corrupt patch at line 11
error: could not build fake ancestor
hint: Use 'git am --show-current-patch' to see the failed patch'

conflict:

@kernel-patches-bot
Copy link
Author

At least one diff in series https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/bpf/list/?series=359505 irrelevant now. Closing PR.

@kernel-patches-bot kernel-patches-bot deleted the series/359505=>bpf branch October 7, 2020 01:45
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 7, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
8966781 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 7, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
da70c75 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
ad9f5b3 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 8, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
1d1527d 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
f79255b 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
4b72ad2 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
d9ece28 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
fdb6c3c 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 10, 2023
@seehearfeel
test_bpf: Rename second ALU64_SMOD_X to ALU64_SMOD_K
5181dc0 
Currently, there are two test cases with same name
"ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1", the first one is right,
the second one should be ALU64_SMOD_K because its
code is BPF_ALU64 | BPF_MOD | BPF_K.

Before:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

After:
test_bpf: #170 ALU64_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS
test_bpf: #171 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 4 PASS

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Tiezhu Yang <[email protected]>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <[email protected]>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/[email protected]
Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <[email protected]>
kernel-patches-daemon-bpf bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 5, 2024
@chleroy
powerpc/bpf/32: Fix failing test_bpf tests
ce979c3 
Recent additions in BPF like cpu v4 instructions, test_bpf module
exhibits the following failures:

	test_bpf: #82 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #83 ALU_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #84 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_B jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #85 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_H jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #86 ALU64_MOVSX | BPF_W jited:1 ret 2 != 1 (0x2 != 0x1)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #165 ALU_SDIV_X: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #166 ALU_SDIV_K: -6 / 2 = -3 jited:1 ret 2147483645 != -3 (0x7ffffffd != 0xfffffffd)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #169 ALU_SMOD_X: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)
	test_bpf: #170 ALU_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #172 ALU64_SMOD_K: -7 % 2 = -1 jited:1 ret 1 != -1 (0x1 != 0xffffffff)FAIL (1 times)

	test_bpf: #313 BSWAP 16: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcd
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 301 PASS
	test_bpf: #314 BSWAP 32: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0xefcdab89
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 555 PASS
	test_bpf: #315 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef -> 0x67452301
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 268 PASS
	test_bpf: #316 BSWAP 64: 0x0123456789abcdef >> 32 -> 0xefcdab89
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 269 PASS
	test_bpf: #317 BSWAP 16: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x1032
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 460 PASS
	test_bpf: #318 BSWAP 32: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x10325476
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 320 PASS
	test_bpf: #319 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 -> 0x98badcfe
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 222 PASS
	test_bpf: #320 BSWAP 64: 0xfedcba9876543210 >> 32 -> 0x10325476
	eBPF filter opcode 00d7 (@2) unsupported
	jited:0 273 PASS

	test_bpf: #344 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_B
	eBPF filter opcode 0091 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 432 PASS
	test_bpf: #345 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_H
	eBPF filter opcode 0089 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 381 PASS
	test_bpf: #346 BPF_LDX_MEMSX | BPF_W
	eBPF filter opcode 0081 (@5) unsupported
	jited:0 505 PASS

	test_bpf: #490 JMP32_JA: Unconditional jump: if (true) return 1
	eBPF filter opcode 0006 (@1) unsupported
	jited:0 261 PASS

	test_bpf: Summary: 1040 PASSED, 10 FAILED, [924/1038 JIT'ed]

Fix them by adding missing processing.

Fixes: daabb2b ("bpf/tests: add tests for cpuv4 instructions")
Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bpf not-applicable V1
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
1 participant
@kernel-patches-bot