Merge branch 'introduce dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS'

Hou Tao says:

====================

Hi,

Currently the test of BPF STRUCT_OPS depends on the specific bpf
implementation (e.g, tcp_congestion_ops), but it can not cover all
basic functionalities (e.g, return value handling), so introduce
a dummy BPF STRUCT_OPS for test purpose.

Instead of loading a userspace-implemeted bpf_dummy_ops map into
kernel and calling the specific function by writing to sysfs provided
by bpf_testmode.ko, only loading bpf_dummy_ops related prog into
kernel and calling these prog by bpf_prog_test_run(). The latter
is more flexible and has no dependency on extra kernel module.

Now the return value handling is supported by test_1(...) ops,
and passing multiple arguments is supported by test_2(...) ops.
If more is needed, test_x(...) ops can be added afterwards.

Comments are always welcome.
Regards,
Hou

Change Log:
v4:
 * add Acked-by tags in patch 1~4
 * patch 2: remove unncessary comments and update commit message
            accordingly
 * patch 4: remove unnecessary nr checking in dummy_ops_init_args()

v3: https://www.spinics.net/lists/bpf/msg48303.html
 * rebase on bpf-next
 * address comments for Martin, mainly include: merge patch 3 &
   patch 4 in v2, fix names of btf ctx access check helpers,
   handle CONFIG_NET, fix leak in dummy_ops_init_args(), and
   simplify bpf_dummy_init()
 * patch 4: use a loop to check args in test_dummy_multiple_args()

v2: https://www.spinics.net/lists/bpf/msg47948.html
 * rebase on bpf-next
 * add test_2(...) ops to test the passing of multiple arguments
 * a new patch (patch #2) is added to factor out ctx access helpers
 * address comments from Martin & Andrii

v1: https://www.spinics.net/lists/bpf/msg46787.html

RFC: https://www.spinics.net/lists/bpf/msg46117.html
====================

Signed-off-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>

1 files changed, 2 insertions, 14 deletions

diff --git a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
index cbcd0d6fca7c..7396488793ff 100644
--- a/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
+++ b/kernel/trace/bpf_trace.c
@@ -1646,13 +1646,7 @@ static bool raw_tp_prog_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
 					const struct bpf_prog *prog,
 					struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
 {
-	if (off < 0 || off >= sizeof(__u64) * MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS)
-		return false;
-	if (type != BPF_READ)
-		return false;
-	if (off % size != 0)
-		return false;
-	return true;
+	return bpf_tracing_ctx_access(off, size, type);
 }
 
 static bool tracing_prog_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
@@ -1660,13 +1654,7 @@ static bool tracing_prog_is_valid_access(int off, int size,
 					 const struct bpf_prog *prog,
 					 struct bpf_insn_access_aux *info)
 {
-	if (off < 0 || off >= sizeof(__u64) * MAX_BPF_FUNC_ARGS)
-		return false;
-	if (type != BPF_READ)
-		return false;
-	if (off % size != 0)
-		return false;
-	return btf_ctx_access(off, size, type, prog, info);
+	return bpf_tracing_btf_ctx_access(off, size, type, prog, info);
 }
 
 int __weak bpf_prog_test_run_tracing(struct bpf_prog *prog,