system/linux
system/linux
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/torvalds/linux synced 2024-10-08 20:34:15 +00:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

selftest/bpf: Fix rst formatting in readme

Browse source 
A couple of places in the readme had invalid rst formatting causing the
rendering to be off. This patch fixes them with minimal edits.

Signed-off-by: Andrei Matei <andreimatei1@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Acked-by: Yonghong Song <yhs@fb.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20201122022205.57229-2-andreimatei1@gmail.com
This commit is contained in:
Andrei Matei 2020-11-21 21:22:05 -05:00 committed by Daniel Borkmann
parent 05a98d7672
commit 1c26ac6ab3
1 changed files with 15 additions and 13 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

28
tools/testing/selftests/bpf/README.rst
View file

@ -33,11 +33,12 @@ The verifier will reject such code with above error.
At insn 18 the r7 is indeed unbounded. The later insn 19 checks the bounds and At insn 18 the r7 is indeed unbounded. The later insn 19 checks the bounds and
the insn 20 undoes map_value addition. It is currently impossible for the the insn 20 undoes map_value addition. It is currently impossible for the
verifier to understand such speculative pointer arithmetic. verifier to understand such speculative pointer arithmetic.
Hence Hence `this patch`__ addresses it on the compiler side. It was committed on llvm 12.
https://reviews.llvm.org/D85570
addresses it on the compiler side. It was committed on llvm 12. __ https://reviews.llvm.org/D85570
The corresponding C code The corresponding C code
.. code-block:: c .. code-block:: c
for (int i = 0; i < MAX_CGROUPS_PATH_DEPTH; i++) { for (int i = 0; i < MAX_CGROUPS_PATH_DEPTH; i++) {
@ -80,10 +81,11 @@ The symptom for ``bpf_iter/netlink`` looks like
17: (7b) *(u64 *)(r7 +0) = r2 17: (7b) *(u64 *)(r7 +0) = r2
only read is supported only read is supported
This is due to a llvm BPF backend bug. The fix This is due to a llvm BPF backend bug. `The fix`__
https://reviews.llvm.org/D78466
has been pushed to llvm 10.x release branch and will be has been pushed to llvm 10.x release branch and will be
available in 10.0.1. The fix is available in llvm 11.0.0 trunk. available in 10.0.1. The patch is available in llvm 11.0.0 trunk.
__ https://reviews.llvm.org/D78466
BPF CO-RE-based tests and Clang version BPF CO-RE-based tests and Clang version
======================================= =======================================
@ -97,11 +99,11 @@ them to Clang/LLVM. These sub-tests are going to be skipped if Clang is too
old to support them, they shouldn't cause build failures or runtime test old to support them, they shouldn't cause build failures or runtime test
failures: failures:
- __builtin_btf_type_id() ([0], [1], [2]); - __builtin_btf_type_id() [0_, 1_, 2_];
- __builtin_preserve_type_info(), __builtin_preserve_enum_value() ([3], [4]). - __builtin_preserve_type_info(), __builtin_preserve_enum_value() [3_, 4_].
[0] https://reviews.llvm.org/D74572 .. _0: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74572
[1] https://reviews.llvm.org/D74668 .. _1: https://reviews.llvm.org/D74668
[2] https://reviews.llvm.org/D85174 .. _2: https://reviews.llvm.org/D85174
[3] https://reviews.llvm.org/D83878 .. _3: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83878
[4] https://reviews.llvm.org/D83242 .. _4: https://reviews.llvm.org/D83242