Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Add test cases to see how verifier handles -INT64_MIN #677

Open
dthaler opened this issue Sep 10, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #733
Open

Add test cases to see how verifier handles -INT64_MIN #677

dthaler opened this issue Sep 10, 2024 · 2 comments · May be fixed by #733

Comments

@dthaler
Copy link
Contributor

dthaler commented Sep 10, 2024

INT64_MIN/(-1) cannot be represented, nor can INT64_MIN*(-1), nor can -INT64_MIN.
We should probably add these as test cases.
@dthaler
Copy link
Contributor Author

dthaler commented Oct 15, 2024

See https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/bpf/nvaEmn-ydpHd0_0CvEzELp092FU/ for discussion

@dthaler
Copy link
Contributor Author

dthaler commented Oct 15, 2024

Added test cases to bpf_conformance suite in Alan-Jowett/bpf_conformance#325

Once that is merged, I will generate a verifier PR to add these test cases.
However, I already verified that they pass.

dthaler added a commit to dthaler/ebpf-verifier that referenced this issue Oct 16, 2024
@dthaler
Add test cases for INTMIN/-1
d86db67 
Fixes vbpf#677

Signed-off-by: Dave Thaler <[email protected]>
@dthaler dthaler linked a pull request Oct 16, 2024 that will close this issue
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

Add test cases for INTMIN/-1 dthaler/ebpf-verifier
1 participant
@dthaler