On Tue, Jul 1, 2025 at 1:32 AM Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 27, 2025 at 04:20:58PM +0000, Song Liu wrote: > > > > > > > On Jun 27, 2025, at 8:59 AM, Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 9:04 PM Song Liu <song@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> > > >> On Thu, Jun 26, 2025 at 7:14 PM Alexei Starovoitov > > >> <alexei.starovoitov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > >> [...] > > >>> ./test_progs -t lsm_cgroup > > >>> Summary: 1/2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > >>> ./test_progs -t lsm_cgroup > > >>> Summary: 1/2 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > >>> ./test_progs -t cgroup_xattr > > >>> Summary: 1/8 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 0 FAILED > > >>> ./test_progs -t lsm_cgroup > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:PASS:bind(ETH_P_ALL) 0 nsec > > >>> (network_helpers.c:121: errno: Cannot assign requested address) Failed > > >>> to bind socket > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:start_server unexpected start_server: > > >>> actual -1 < expected 0 > > >>> (network_helpers.c:360: errno: Bad file descriptor) getsockopt(SOL_PROTOCOL) > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:connect_to_fd unexpected > > >>> connect_to_fd: actual -1 < expected 0 > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:accept unexpected accept: actual -1 < expected 0 > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:getsockopt unexpected getsockopt: > > >>> actual -1 < expected 0 > > >>> test_lsm_cgroup_functional:FAIL:sk_priority unexpected sk_priority: > > >>> actual 0 != expected 234 > > >>> ... > > >>> Summary: 0/1 PASSED, 0 SKIPPED, 1 FAILED > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> Song, > > >>> Please follow up with the fix for selftest. > > >>> It will be in bpf-next only. > > >> > > >> The issue is because cgroup_xattr calls "ip link set dev lo up" > > >> in setup, and calls "ip link set dev lo down" in cleanup. Most > > >> other tests only call "ip link set dev lo up". IOW, it appears to > > >> me that cgroup_xattr is doing the cleanup properly. To fix this, > > >> we can either remove "dev lo down" from cgroup_xattr, or add > > >> "dev lo up" to lsm_cgroups. Do you have any preference one > > >> way or another? > > > > > > It messes with "lo" without switching netns? Ouch. > > > > Ah, I see the problem now. > > > > > Not sure what tests you copied that code from, > > > but all "ip" commands, ping_group_range, and sockets > > > don't need to be in the test. Instead of triggering > > > progs through lsm/socket_connect hook can't you use > > > a simple hook like lsm/bpf or lsm/file_open that doesn't require > > > networking setup ? > > > > Yeah, let me fix the test with a different hook. > > Where's the patch? Here is a fix to kernel/bpf/helprs.c by Eduard: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250627175309.2710973-1-eddyz87@xxxxxxxxx/ This fix addresses build errors with certain config. Here is my fix to the selftests: https://lore.kernel.org/bpf/20250627191221.765921-1-song@xxxxxxxxxx/ I didn't CC linux-fsdevel because all the changes are in the selftests, and the error is independent of the new code. Thanks, Song
