From nobody Sun Feb 8 17:43:35 2026 Received: from out-172.mta1.migadu.com (out-172.mta1.migadu.com [95.215.58.172]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB61333FE0A for ; Tue, 28 Oct 2025 15:20:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761664832; cv=none; b=A79bVvWqfQV7UqCvZzdLvQdQ58rRw5ZSBarWks1hpJ6I3WSrC3/sjcbnEL4EXr9YfJalcQxGD8n+srZIX9yHOQG0T+6GobxSE0XaTGoe4u7GlSXXbPggd/c14n+FFwrlYBS8O3VNMOFcUhjmzEFv8Xun+gfP1+Xt0eupGBcDwfU= ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1761664832; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HYd2qH7FWSYKEo+EVxagg1RUtl38TekujFQnRYEMBtY=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version; b=jS6M6HfgWajnhYo9/6l7Scv9D2+TXciaUsw/0ok2o96XUEWY8jKv1m+9BpQag4gPElyrGeJ/BuNxrlG2fdg+766/MKy+LDuyKHXqYIsvQ5ZUd5pD2VMuLCFnJe8+22MRXkn13yuCMAVI5tZx24In61PbUwRRCIGRlK6U1NwnaLs= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b=ZVlRfk5d; arc=none smtp.client-ip=95.215.58.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.dev Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.dev header.i=@linux.dev header.b="ZVlRfk5d" X-Report-Abuse: Please report any abuse attempt to abuse@migadu.com and include these headers. DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.dev; s=key1; t=1761664829; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=FBxBqu3N+DlOX27bsFsVYIxqbBpbd6ybHXvJvZNNT5E=; b=ZVlRfk5d74WPMBIH8ldQdIY8hxKmUlxbUA639saRb9HsLjkj5W/H2wzvsovLXZCn2jeoqc 2zFv0ACVKfYwSjpC2wv/xLwWOjqMhs9Yb+JaoKBuVsO9prkrAKL1KaUzgOeV04DmdE1z4t ZXcDrxnAeNJOCUSTmGWi/q7BAZnlG8s= From: KaFai Wan To: ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, john.fastabend@gmail.com, andrii@kernel.org, martin.lau@linux.dev, eddyz87@gmail.com, song@kernel.org, yonghong.song@linux.dev, kpsingh@kernel.org, sdf@fomichev.me, haoluo@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, shuah@kernel.org, paul.chaignon@gmail.com, m.shachnai@gmail.com, kafai.wan@linux.dev, harishankar.vishwanathan@gmail.com, colin.i.king@gmail.com, luis.gerhorst@fau.de, shung-hsi.yu@suse.com, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org Subject: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/2] selftests/bpf: Range analysis test case for JEQ Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 23:19:38 +0800 Message-ID: <20251028151938.3872003-3-kafai.wan@linux.dev> In-Reply-To: <20251028151938.3872003-1-kafai.wan@linux.dev> References: <20251028151938.3872003-1-kafai.wan@linux.dev> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_OUT Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" This patch adds coverage for the warning detected by syzkaller and fixed in the previous patch. Without the previous patch, this test fails with: verifier bug: REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION (true_reg1): range bounds violation u64=3D[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] s64=3D[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] u32=3D[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] s32=3D[0xffffff00, 0xffffff00] var_off=3D(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) verifier bug: REG INVARIANTS VIOLATION (true_reg2): range bounds violation u64=3D[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] s64=3D[0xffffffffffffff01, 0xffffffffffffff00] u32=3D[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] s32=3D[0xffffff01, 0xffffff00] var_off=3D(0xffffffffffffff00, 0x0) Signed-off-by: KaFai Wan --- .../selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c | 23 +++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+) diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c b/tools/te= sting/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c index 0a72e0228ea9..304ab5a07a3b 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/verifier_bounds.c @@ -1550,6 +1550,29 @@ l0_%=3D: r0 =3D 0; \ : __clobber_all); } =20 +SEC("socket") +__description("dead branch on jeq, does not result in invariants violation= error") +__success __log_level(2) +__retval(0) __flag(BPF_F_TEST_REG_INVARIANTS) +__naked void jeq_range_analysis(void) +{ + asm volatile (" \ + call %[bpf_get_prandom_u32]; \ + r6 =3D r0; \ + r6 &=3D 0xFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF0; \ + r7 =3D r0; \ + r7 &=3D 0x07; \ + r7 -=3D 0xFF; \ + if r6 =3D=3D r7 goto l1_%=3D; \ +l0_%=3D: r0 =3D 0; \ + exit; \ +l1_%=3D: r0 =3D 1; \ + exit; \ +" : + : __imm(bpf_get_prandom_u32) + : __clobber_all); +} + /* This test covers the bounds deduction on 64bits when the s64 and u64 ra= nges * overlap on the negative side. At instruction 7, the ranges look as foll= ows: * --=20 2.43.0