On Mon, Jul 8, 2019 at 3:43 PM Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> The bpf_prog_test_run_xattr function gives more options to set up a
> test run of a BPF program than the bpf_prog_test_run function.
>
> We will need this extra flexibility to pass ctx data later.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krzesimir Nowak <krzesimir@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
lgtm, with some nits below
Acked-by: Andrii Nakryiko <andriin@xxxxxx>
> tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c | 16 +++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> index c7541f572932..1640ba9f12c1 100644
> --- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/test_verifier.c
> @@ -822,14 +822,20 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> {
> __u8 tmp[TEST_DATA_LEN << 2];
> __u32 size_tmp = sizeof(tmp);
nit: this is now is not needed as a separate local variable, inline?
> - uint32_t retval;
> int saved_errno;
> int err;
> + struct bpf_prog_test_run_attr attr = {
> + .prog_fd = fd_prog,
> + .repeat = 1,
> + .data_in = data,
> + .data_size_in = size_data,
> + .data_out = tmp,
> + .data_size_out = size_tmp,
> + };
>
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(true);
> - err = bpf_prog_test_run(fd_prog, 1, data, size_data,
> - tmp, &size_tmp, &retval, NULL);
> + err = bpf_prog_test_run_xattr(&attr);
> saved_errno = errno;
> if (unpriv)
> set_admin(false);
> @@ -846,9 +852,9 @@ static int do_prog_test_run(int fd_prog, bool unpriv, uint32_t expected_val,
> return err;
> }
> }
> - if (retval != expected_val &&
> + if (attr.retval != expected_val &&
> expected_val != POINTER_VALUE) {
this if condition now fits one line, can you please combine? thanks!
> - printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", retval, expected_val);
> + printf("FAIL retval %d != %d ", attr.retval, expected_val);
> return 1;
> }
>
> --
> 2.20.1
>
