Re: [PATCH net] kunit: Fix again checksum tests on big endian CPUs

From: Charlie Jenkins
Date: Fri Feb 23 2024 - 15:05:57 EST


On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 06:15:16PM +0000, Christophe Leroy wrote:
>
>
> Le 23/02/2024 à 18:57, Charlie Jenkins a écrit :
> > On Fri, Feb 23, 2024 at 11:41:52AM +0100, Christophe Leroy wrote:
> >> Commit b38460bc463c ("kunit: Fix checksum tests on big endian CPUs")
> >> fixed endianness issues with kunit checksum tests, but then
> >> commit 6f4c45cbcb00 ("kunit: Add tests for csum_ipv6_magic and
> >> ip_fast_csum") introduced new issues on big endian CPUs. Those issues
> >> are once again reflected by the warnings reported by sparse.
> >>
> >> So, fix them with the same approach, perform proper conversion in
> >> order to support both little and big endian CPUs. Once the conversions
> >> are properly done and the right types used, the sparse warnings are
> >> cleared as well.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Erhard Furtner <erhard_f@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Fixes: 6f4c45cbcb00 ("kunit: Add tests for csum_ipv6_magic and ip_fast_csum")
> >> Signed-off-by: Christophe Leroy <christophe.leroy@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >> ---
> >> lib/checksum_kunit.c | 17 +++++++++--------
> >> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> >>
> >> diff --git a/lib/checksum_kunit.c b/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> >> index 225bb7701460..bf70850035c7 100644
> >> --- a/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> >> +++ b/lib/checksum_kunit.c
> >> @@ -215,7 +215,7 @@ static const u32 init_sums_no_overflow[] = {
> >> 0xffff0000, 0xfffffffb,
> >> };
> >>
> >> -static const __sum16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> >> +static const u16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> >> 0x18d4, 0x3085, 0x2e4b, 0xd9f4, 0xbdc8, 0x78f, 0x1034, 0x8422, 0x6fc0,
> >> 0xd2f6, 0xbeb5, 0x9d3, 0x7e2a, 0x312e, 0x778e, 0xc1bb, 0x7cf2, 0x9d1e,
> >> 0xca21, 0xf3ff, 0x7569, 0xb02e, 0xca86, 0x7e76, 0x4539, 0x45e3, 0xf28d,
> >> @@ -241,7 +241,7 @@ static const __sum16 expected_csum_ipv6_magic[] = {
> >> 0x3845, 0x1014
> >> };
> >>
> >> -static const __sum16 expected_fast_csum[] = {
> >> +static const u16 expected_fast_csum[] = {
> >> 0xda83, 0x45da, 0x4f46, 0x4e4f, 0x34e, 0xe902, 0xa5e9, 0x87a5, 0x7187,
> >> 0x5671, 0xf556, 0x6df5, 0x816d, 0x8f81, 0xbb8f, 0xfbba, 0x5afb, 0xbe5a,
> >> 0xedbe, 0xabee, 0x6aac, 0xe6b, 0xea0d, 0x67ea, 0x7e68, 0x8a7e, 0x6f8a,
> >> @@ -577,7 +577,8 @@ static void test_csum_no_carry_inputs(struct kunit *test)
> >>
> >> static void test_ip_fast_csum(struct kunit *test)
> >> {
> >> - __sum16 csum_result, expected;
> >> + __sum16 csum_result;
> >> + u16 expected;
> >>
> >> for (int len = IPv4_MIN_WORDS; len < IPv4_MAX_WORDS; len++) {
> >> for (int index = 0; index < NUM_IP_FAST_CSUM_TESTS; index++) {
> >> @@ -586,7 +587,7 @@ static void test_ip_fast_csum(struct kunit *test)
> >> expected_fast_csum[(len - IPv4_MIN_WORDS) *
> >> NUM_IP_FAST_CSUM_TESTS +
> >> index];
> >> - CHECK_EQ(expected, csum_result);
> >> + CHECK_EQ(to_sum16(expected), csum_result);
> >> }
> >> }
> >> }
> >> @@ -598,7 +599,7 @@ static void test_csum_ipv6_magic(struct kunit *test)
> >> const struct in6_addr *daddr;
> >> unsigned int len;
> >> unsigned char proto;
> >> - unsigned int csum;
> >> + __wsum csum;
> >>
> >> const int daddr_offset = sizeof(struct in6_addr);
> >> const int len_offset = sizeof(struct in6_addr) + sizeof(struct in6_addr);
> >> @@ -611,10 +612,10 @@ static void test_csum_ipv6_magic(struct kunit *test)
> >> saddr = (const struct in6_addr *)(random_buf + i);
> >> daddr = (const struct in6_addr *)(random_buf + i +
> >> daddr_offset);
> >> - len = *(unsigned int *)(random_buf + i + len_offset);
> >> + len = le32_to_cpu(*(__le32 *)(random_buf + i + len_offset));
> >> proto = *(random_buf + i + proto_offset);
> >> - csum = *(unsigned int *)(random_buf + i + csum_offset);
> >> - CHECK_EQ(expected_csum_ipv6_magic[i],
> >> + csum = *(__wsum *)(random_buf + i + csum_offset);
> >> + CHECK_EQ(to_sum16(expected_csum_ipv6_magic[i]),
> >> csum_ipv6_magic(saddr, daddr, len, proto, csum));
> >> }
> >> #endif /* !CONFIG_NET */
> >> --
> >> 2.43.0
> >>
> >
> > There is no need to duplicate efforts here. This has already been
> > resolved by
> > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240221-fix_sparse_errors_checksum_tests-v9-2-bff4d73ab9d1@xxxxxxxxxxxx/.
> >
>
> The idea here is to provide a fix which is similar to the one done
> previously and that uses the same approach and reuses the same helpers.
>
> This is to keep the code homogeneous.
>
> Christophe

htons makes more sense here since this is networking code, but I don't
care enough to argue the point. I tested it on big endian SPARC and on
riscv. I'll base my alignment patch on this.

Tested-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>