Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 2/2] selftests/bpf: Add testcase where 7th argment is struct

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On 2024/4/3 23:50, Pu Lehui wrote:


On 2024/4/3 22:40, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
On 4/3/24 9:28 AM, Pu Lehui wrote:
From: Pu Lehui <pulehui@xxxxxxxxxx>

Add testcase where 7th argument is struct for architectures with 8
argument registers, and increase the complexity of the struct.

Signed-off-by: Pu Lehui <pulehui@xxxxxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
  tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64  |  1 +
  .../selftests/bpf/bpf_testmod/bpf_testmod.c   | 19 ++++++++++
  .../selftests/bpf/prog_tests/tracing_struct.c | 13 +++++++
  .../selftests/bpf/progs/tracing_struct.c      | 35 +++++++++++++++++++
  4 files changed, 68 insertions(+)

diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64 b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
index d8ade15e2789..639ee3f5bc74 100644
--- a/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
+++ b/tools/testing/selftests/bpf/DENYLIST.aarch64
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ kprobe_multi_test                                # needs CONFIG_FPROBE   module_attach                                    # prog 'kprobe_multi': failed to auto-attach: -95   fentry_test/fentry_many_args                     # fentry_many_args:FAIL:fentry_many_args_attach unexpected error: -524   fexit_test/fexit_many_args                       # fexit_many_args:FAIL:fexit_many_args_attach unexpected error: -524 +tracing_struct                                   # test_fentry:FAIL:tracing_struct__attach unexpected error: -524

Do we need to blacklist the whole test given it had coverage on arm64
before.. perhaps this test here could be done as a new subtest and only
that one is listed for arm64?

Yeah, I thought so at first, just like fexit_many_args of fentry/fexit, but I found that the things struct_tracing does are all in the same series, but the number or type of parameters are different, and the new use case I added is the same in this way. And I found that the execution logic of stract_tracing is relatively simple and clear, triggering all hook points, executing all bpf programs, and asserting all parameters.
Shall we need to slice them up?

ping~ Daniel, shall we need to do that?



  fill_link_info/kprobe_multi_link_info            # bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts unexpected error: -95   fill_link_info/kretprobe_multi_link_info         # bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts unexpected error: -95   fill_link_info/kprobe_multi_invalid_ubuff        # bpf_program__attach_kprobe_multi_opts unexpected error: -95

Thanks,
Daniel





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Samsung SoC]     [Linux Rockchip SoC]     [Linux Actions SoC]     [Linux for Synopsys ARC Processors]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]


  Powered by Linux