Re: [PATCH net-next] bpf: test for AND edge cases

2017-02-03 Thread Josef Bacik
On Fri, 2017-02-03 at 16:03 -0500, David Miller wrote: > From: Josef Bacik > Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 12:00:38 -0500 > > > > > These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba.  The > > first test is > > just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative > >

Re: [PATCH net-next] bpf: test for AND edge cases

2017-02-03 Thread David Miller
From: Josef Bacik Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2017 12:00:38 -0500 > These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test > is > just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if > it > would result in a valid index for the array. The

Re: [PATCH net-next] bpf: test for AND edge cases

2017-02-02 Thread Daniel Borkmann
On 02/02/2017 06:00 PM, Josef Bacik wrote: These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the

Re: [PATCH net-next] bpf: test for AND edge cases

2017-02-02 Thread Alexei Starovoitov
On 2/2/17 9:00 AM, Josef Bacik wrote: These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original

[PATCH net-next] bpf: test for AND edge cases

2017-02-02 Thread Josef Bacik
These two tests are based on the work done for f23cc643f9ba. The first test is just a basic one to make sure we don't allow AND'ing negative values, even if it would result in a valid index for the array. The second is a cleaned up version of the original testcase provided by Jann Horn that