On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 1:58 AM Yonghong Song <yhs@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 10/17/19 8:00 AM, Carlos Neira wrote: > > Self tests added for new helper > > > > Signed-off-by: Carlos Neira <cneirabustos@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > .../bpf/prog_tests/get_ns_current_pid_tgid.c | 96 +++++++++++++++++++ > > .../bpf/progs/get_ns_current_pid_tgid_kern.c | 53 ++++++++++ It looks like typical naming convention is: prog_test/<something>.c progs/test_<something>.c Let's keep this consistent. I'm about to do a bit smarter Makefile that will capture this convention, so it's good to have less exception to create. Thanks! Otherwise, besides what Yonghong mentioned, this look good to me. > > 2 files changed, 149 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/prog_tests/get_ns_current_pid_tgid.c > > create mode 100644 tools/testing/selftests/bpf/progs/get_ns_current_pid_tgid_kern.c > > [...] > > + prog = bpf_object__find_program_by_title(obj, probe_name); > > + if (CHECK(!prog, "find_probe", > > + "prog '%s' not found\n", probe_name)) > > + goto cleanup; > > + > > + bpf_program__set_type(prog, BPF_PROG_TYPE_RAW_TRACEPOINT); > > Do we need this? I thought libbpf should automatically > infer program type from section name? We used to, until the patch set that Daniel landed today. Now it can be dropped. > > > + > > + load_attr.obj = obj; > > + load_attr.log_level = 0; > > + load_attr.target_btf_path = NULL; > > + err = bpf_object__load_xattr(&load_attr); > > + if (CHECK(err, "obj_load", > > + "failed to load prog '%s': %d\n", > > + probe_name, err)) > > + goto cleanup; > [...]
