On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 2:49 PM Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 6/27/25 2:38 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 2:36 PM Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 6/27/25 2:34 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 2:19 PM Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 6/27/25 12:12 PM, Song Liu wrote:
> >>>>> cgroup_xattr/read_cgroupfs_xattr has two issues:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. cgroup_xattr/read_cgroupfs_xattr messes up lo without creating a netns
> >>>>> first. This causes issue with other tests.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fix this by using a different hook (lsm.s/file_open) and not messing
> >>>>> with lo.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 2. cgroup_xattr/read_cgroupfs_xattr sets up cgroups without proper
> >>>>> mount namespaces.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fix this by using the existing cgroup helpers. A new helper
> >>>>> set_cgroup_xattr() is added to set xattr on cgroup files.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Fixes: f4fba2d6d282 ("selftests/bpf: Add tests for bpf_cgroup_read_xattr")
> >>>>> Reported-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>> Closes: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/CAADnVQ+iqMi2HEj_iH7hsx+XJAsqaMWqSDe4tzcGAnehFWA9Sw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> Changes v1 => v2:
> >>>>> 1. Add the second fix above.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> v1: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250627165831.2979022-1-song@xxxxxxxxxx/
> >>>>> ---
> >>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/cgroup_helpers.c | 21 ++++
> >>>>> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/cgroup_helpers.h | 4 +
> >>>>> .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/cgroup_xattr.c | 117 ++++--------------
> >>>>> .../selftests/bpf/progs/read_cgroupfs_xattr.c | 4 +-
> >>>>> 4 files changed, 49 insertions(+), 97 deletions(-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi Song.
> >>>>
> >>>> I tried this patch on BPF CI, and it appears it fixes the hanging
> >>>> failure we've been seeing today on bpf-next and netdev.
> >>>> I am going to add it to ci/diffs.
> >>>
> >>> Applied to bpf-next already.
> >>
> >> CI patches apply to all base branches. My understanding is, it's needed
> >> at least for netdev too.
> >
> > How is that possible?
> >
> > The offending commit is only in /master and in /for-next branches,
> > while /for-next is there for linux-next only.
>
> Alexei, for-next contains offending commit, but does not have Song's
> fix. Right now it's the only base branch on BPF CI that uses the temp
> patch.
ok. updated /for-next
> We do run tests on for-next, so I suppose the patch should remain in
> ci/diffs until it's committed into for-next?
It's news to me that we run BPF CI on /for-next.
I thought we only do it on /master and /net.
